STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. 



Governor C. S. Deneen, T. C. Chamberlin, E. J. James, Commissioners 
H. Foster Bain, Director. 


QUALITIES OF 

High-Grade Paving Brick 

and Tests Used in Determining Them 

BY 

A. N. TALBOT 


[From Bulletin No. 9, pp. 47-131] 



URBANA 

University of Illinois 
1908 



TEzb 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
RECEIVED 

MAR 2 0 1924 


OOCUMENTS DIVISION 





zf/s-y&h/ 




QUALITIES OF HIGH GRADE PAVING BRICK AND TESTS 
USED IN DETERMINING THEM. 

[By Arthur N. Taibot.] 


Introduction. 

The extensive use of brick for street paving purposes makes the 
formulation of the qualities requisite for a good paving brick a matter 
of importance to both producer and consumer. Although it may not be 
difficult to agree on these qualities in the abstract, it is not easy to ex¬ 
press the requirements in definite and concrete form and in terms accept¬ 
able to both manufacturer and municipality. It is an accepted principle 
that the quality of an engineering material should not be left merely to 
the judgment of an individual, no matter how experienced the individual 
may be; recourse should be had to physical tests and these should be 
definite and discriminating. Such tests may not of themselves be con¬ 
clusive, the results are in the nature of evidence which must be inter¬ 
preted and judged in the light of other information. Perfect materials 
for a pavement may not be obtained and high quality usually means 
increased cost of production, but on the other hand the additional cost 
of a good article is usually made up many times over,, in the increased 
length of life and improved surface of ' the',pavement 'as compared with a 
pavement in which an inferior brick is used'.’ ’The problem of formu¬ 
lating requirements and making tests is ‘further complicated by the diffi¬ 
culties encountered in selecting brick for test and comparison from the 
piles of brick along the street and in judging whether the variation from 
the average throughout these piles is.!^iffiment-of atsdlto bp cause for re¬ 
jection. Enough has been said to justify the view' that the formulation' 
of the qualities needed in a high grade paving brick and the use and 
interpretation of physical tests for determining the qualities of the brick 
for aiding in deciding whether brick come up to the required grade, are 
matters worthy of discussion by engineers and manufacturers. A general 
statement of matters connected with brick testing may be of advantage to 
many who are interested in the construction and use of brick pavement. 

Most specifications for materials set forth qualities of materials to be 
furnished by the producer to the consumer. In the case of brick pave¬ 
ments the producer (i. e., the manufacturer) and the consumer (i. e., the 
municipality and the property owner, as represented by the municipal 
administrative officers) are to use certain requirements to define the ma¬ 
terial to be put into the pavement. Some of the purposes of these re¬ 
quirements and tests may be expressed as follows: 

1. To make a basis or definition of what is wanted and what is to be 
furnished. This is the commonly accepted purpose of such requirements and 
tests. 


47 



48 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[bull. no. 9 


r ^° enable the city to secure material which will be as serviceable as 
other materia 1 which has passed the requirements and which has stood the 
o traffic and time. This makes the tests in a sense a guaranty of quality, 
o. lo enable comparisons to be made between the products offered. It 
is quite possible that tests may show that a given brick is above the require¬ 
ments, 01 that a slight difference in price is made up many times by the 
superior quality of the article. 

4. lo improve the general quality of the product put on the market. It 
has frequently happened that the formulation of requirements and the care- 

u inspection of the articles offered have resulted in improved quality and 
this in many cases even without increasing the cost of productio’n. The 
manufacturer has been stimulated thereby to study the process of production 
and to seek to improve methods of manufacture and quality of product One 
need instance only structural steel and paints and oils to show improve¬ 
ments m quality following carefully made requirements and tests to show 
the beneficial influence of adequate inspection and tests. 

5. To safeguard the interests of the public and of the taxpayer. The Illi¬ 

nois law requires, and rightfully, too, that the nature and quality of the 
improvement shall be explicitly stated, and evidently intends that the tax- 
payer may be able to determine (1) what the improvement is to be and (2) 
whether it is being put in as' described. ’ 1 

6. In the occasional cases where abuse of authority or improper or dis¬ 
honest construction may require a check, to enable control to be exercised 
over incapable or dishonest contractors or city officials, and to restrain care¬ 
less or inefficient employes, or men who may have a mistaken notion of what 
their employer’s interests are. 

7 - To educate producer, consumer, and their agents in a knowiedge of the 
qualities needed m paving brick,—from the manufacturer and the contractor 
and their employes to the mayor, the engineer, the inspector, and the prop¬ 
erty owner. It should be recognized that those who have charge of munici- 
pai work are a constantly changing class, and that the property owner may 
have little knowledge of pavement construction. 

8 Not the least important of the reasons for having an explicit and definite 
statement of the qualities and requirements for a paving brick is to give 
the opportunity for all bids to be made on the same basis and for the bidder 
„° . x his price according to the quality of the article wanted and thus to 
facilitate fair competition. LO 

It is evident that a knowledge of the qualities 'of a high-grade rav¬ 
ing brick and of the defects to be avoided in the selection of brick will 
be useful m making up the requirements defining the grade of brick to 
be used and that the method of making tests ought to be studied both in 
relation to the wear of the brick m the street and to the bearing of the 
results of the physical tests upon the wearing and other qualities of the 
brick. In this article a discussion of the qualities needed in a paving 
brick wdl be given first, and the bearing of the tests upon these qualitief 

ib 1 th +b a® th ? u i h wil1 be seen that the relation between 

c method of testing and the quality to be determined is so intimate 
that their discussion must be carried on together to a considerable extent.' 


QUALITIES EOR A HIGH GRADE PAVING BRICK. 

General.—-Paving brick should possess the following qualities- 1 
Toughness, hardness, and strength. 2. Uniformity of quality through¬ 
out a given lot of brick 3 Homogeneity of structure and freedom 
from laminations 4. Weather-resisting quality. 5. Regularity in 
form and size. These qualities are named somewhat in the order of their 


TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OP HIGH GRADE PAVING BRICK. 


49 


importance, though it should be recognized that several of them are 
mutually inclusive. 

1. Toughness , Hardness , and Strength .—Toughness is that property 
of a material which indicates its ability to withstand destruction by shock 
or impact or by a marked distortion of the form of the piece. It is the 
opposite of brittleness. Of course toughness differs in different - ma¬ 
terials, and it varies in a given material. Mild steel has the property of 
toughness to a marked degree and will withstand distortion and abuse. 
One test of the toughness of a specimen of mild steel is to bend the piece 
cold 180° flat on itself without sign of fracture. Cast iron is a more brit¬ 
tle material and ordinarily is not used to take shock except in. large masses 
and at low stresses. Different grades of cast iron, however, possess differ¬ 
ent degrees of toughness, and a good quality of east iron will bend consid¬ 
erably before rupturing. With such materials the physical property of 
toughness which will permit bending and distortion in relatively thin 
pieces will give ability to withstand blows and the sudden application 
of loads in thicker masses. In the case of paving brick, a lack of tough¬ 
ness causes the brick to chip and spall under the action of horses’ hoofs 
and not to resist blows and abuse under the action of traffic. This ele¬ 
ment of toughness is one of the most important qualities in a good paver. 

Hardness is that property of a material which indicates its ability to 
resist abrasion. The necessity for hardness is self-evident. The grinding 
action of loaded wheels sliding sidewise or even rolling forward wears 
away the surface of the brick and forms grit or dust. This abrasion is 
the principal source of wear in a well-constructed pavement made of a 
good quality of brick. Soft brick will wear rapidly under the action of 
traffic. Hardness is therefore a desirable property for paving brick to 
possess. 

Strength is another important element. The loads of wheels are con¬ 
centrated on a small area, possibly a ton on a fraction of a square inch. 
With an uneven bedding of a brick or other conditions like its being sup¬ 
ported on a pebble.or by an adjoining brick, considerable flexural action 
is developed, and even twisting action, and the'brick acts as a beam. 
With uneven surfaces there may be considerable horizontal thrust. It has 
been argued that lack of strength in the brick does not seriously affect 
brick pavements and that pavements do not fail from this source, but the 
writer has seen brick of a mediocre quality spall under the trust of a 
loaded wheel again and again, and it is not uncommon to see brick broken 
in two by the passage of loaded wagons. Moreover, when a material is 
otherwise severely strained the effect of abrasion and impact is greater, 
and the brick which under heavy stresses remains well below its ultimate 
strength will be better able to withstand the abrasive action which takes 
place under such conditions. Besides, high compressive strength is gen¬ 
erally conducive to hardness, and for granular materials a relatively high 
tensile strength such as accompanies high values in cross breaking is an 
indication of toughness and high resilience in the material. 

The elements of toughness, hardness, and strength are difficult to 
differentiate, since one involves the other. On the other hand, a very 


50 


PAYING BEICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


hard brick may be quite brittle, so much so as to be an inferior article. 
Some very tough bricks are not hard enough to resist abrasive action 
sufficiently. Where this is so, there may be some defect in the process 
or treatment during manufacture. Generally flexural strength goes with 
toughness and compressive strength with hardness. Not all these qual¬ 
ities may be expected to exist to the same degree in brick of different 
makes, and hence the different properties should be considered in discuss¬ 
ing the merits of a variety of brick. 

2. Uniformity of Quality. —In the enumeration of properties needed 
in a paving brick, uniformity of quality throughout a given lot has been 
placed second in the list, and it is believed by the writer that it is hardly 
secondary to the qualities of toughness, hardness, and strength. It is 
highly desirable that all the brick in a given lot shall be as nearly uni¬ 
form in make-up as is practicable with the best materials and manufac¬ 
ture, and especially that brick which will be near each other shall be of 
uniform quality. If one brick is soft and the next one hard, an uneven 
surface will be produced more quickly than otherwise, the resulting soft 
spots receiving harder wear as the low spots appear. A pavement of soft 
but uniform bricks will wear away at a uniform rate, and its surface may 
remain less objectionable than one containing a fair proportion of harder 
brick. The products of some plants are particularly troublesome in this 
direction, while those of others are fairly uniform. This quality or lack 
of this quality renders inspection on the street very difficult, and has 
done as much as any thing to throw discredit on brick pavement. Brick 
manufacturers will render service to their industry by striving to secure 
greater uniformity and municipalities must, on their part, protect their 
interests by holding stricter requirements than in the past. The import¬ 
ance of uniformity has not generally been sufficiently recognized. 

3. Homogeneity of Structure and Freedom from Laminations .— 
Homogeneity of structure gives uniformity of wear throughout the brick 
and adds to ability to resist wear and breakage. A brick of homogeneous 
texture is more likely to possess toughness and strength to the requisite 
degree than is one of variable texture. Laminations in a brick are par¬ 
ticularly objectionable, since they markedly decrease toughness and 
strength, and permit chipping and spalling. It is important that tests 
for toughness, hardness, and strength be made in such a way as to bring 
out the effect of laminations and other defects which may not be apparent 
near the surface of the brick. The brick should be uniform throughout, 
evenly vitrified, and free from spots which result from imperfect crush¬ 
ing and mixing of materials and from any element which will tend to dis¬ 
rupt the brick by later changes in condition. 

4. Weather-resisting Quality. —Strong, tough, hard brick of low poros¬ 
ity and even texture are not injured by weather changes. Soft, weak and 
porous brick are affected by frost and other weather conditions, and a 
laminated and coarse structure promotes disintegration. 

Generally speaking, high grade paving brick are of sufficient strength 
to withstand weather influences, but the combination of weather effect 
and traffic is more noticeable. The writer has observed the spalling and 
grinding of soft brick under heavy loads during the time when they 
were wet and frozen on pavement where the wear was much slower under 


TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GRADE PAYING BRICK. 


51 


better weather conditions. Occasionally a pavement is found where 
rapid deterioration takes place during the early spring. Part of the 
trouble of this sort is due to improper bedding and filling. 

5. Regularity in Form and Size. — Well-formed brick of uniform 
size give a smooth and regular surface to the pavement, and thus add 
to its attractiveness. Besides, such brick will have uniform bearing and 
exert even pressure on the sand cushion below, and thus will remain in 
position during the life of the pavement. Desirable as this uniformity 
is, it does not pay to obtain it at the expense of the wearing qualities, 
and pavements with the smoothest surfaces do not always give the best 
results. Some irregularity in shape and form must be expected and 
permitted, especially with clays of a certain character, bio general 
rule may be formulated, and the amount of irregularity may easily 
be settled upon in connection with any given lot of brick. 

Tests Fob Quality. 

' GENERAL STATEMENT. 

The main advantage of physical tests of paving brick lies in giving 
definite evidence having a bearing upon the properties and qualities 
of the brick. To make this evidence useful, the relation of the method 
of making the tests and their results to the qualities thereby determined 
must be understood. In several of the tests numerical standards may 
be set for general use. However, in many cases and especially for some 
of the tests which may be made, it is best to consider that the results 
are advisory in nature and that hard and fast limits may not be set. 
In subsidiary tests the results may give evidence which confirms find¬ 
ings otherwise made or which throws light upon unsettled questions and 
aids in interpretation of data obtained by other tests. 

In tests of materials it is not essential that the material shall be 
subjected to the same action in the process of testing as it will receive 
in the structure in which it is to be placed. The cold bend test of steel 
is one of the most useful and instructive of tests, but it differs radically 
from any condition -of service in which the steel will be placed. The 
value of a test will depend upon the properties determined, and the 
criterion will be, does the test establish definitely certain properties of 
the material, or does it give definite evidence concerning specific qual¬ 
ities, and does not the method give results similar to those found in 
service. Thus the ordinary rattler test is quite unlike the action of 
traffic on a street, but if it determines -the toughness and hardness of 
a brick sufficiently well it serves its purpose. Because high grade 
paving brick do not crush in service is not conclusive evidence that the 
results of crushing tests do not give important information concerning 
the qualities of a given lot of brick. Of course, a test which approx¬ 
imates the conditions of wear and stress in the street pavement has a 
distinct advantage in that it appeals to the lay mind and gives the muni¬ 
cipal officer and the tax payer confidence in the findings which would 
not be possible in a test of seemingly less direct applicability. What¬ 
ever the test, its purpose and the bearing of the results on the qualities 
desired in the brick -should be understood and accepted by all. 


52 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


The tests which have been used, some of them very commonly, others 
only occasionally, are: 1. the rattler test (called also the impact and 
abrasion test) ; 2. the absorption test; 3. the crushing test; 4. the 
cross-breaking test; 5. the specific gravity test. The rattler test is 
commonly considered to determine toughness and hardness, or resist¬ 
ance to impact and abrasion. The absorption test gives information 
bearing upon the degree of hardness to which the brick has been 
burned. The cross-breaking test and the crushing test determine 
strength and incidentally give evidence of the hardness and toughness 
of the brick. The specific gravity test must be classed among those 
tests which are of value in giving general information. The manner of 
making these tests will now be described and some discussion given of 
the meaning of the results found by the various tests. 

THE RATTLER TEST. 

It may be of interest to recount some of the efforts which have led 
up to the present standing of the rattler test. During the earlier years’ 
experience in the construction of brick pavement the judgment of those 
in charge of the work was the only guide used when passing upon the 
quality of paving brick. It was soon seen that some test to measure 
the ability of a brick to resist wear was needed, and the use.of the 
foundry rattler or tumbler, employed in foundries for cleaning castings, 
was suggested. Brick were placed in these rattlers with a charge of 
foundry shot, which is generally composed of a miscellaneous lot of 
broken castings of various sizes and weights and of varying degrees of 
roughness and irregularity. The rattler, with its charge of brick and 
shot, was then rotated for some time, and the loss.in weight of the 
brick was determined. It is easy to see that there was small chance 
of anything like uniformity in making this test. Each individual used 
the rattler which was available for the purpose, without reference to its 
size. The speed used in the test was whatever the foundry happened to'be 
using. The total number of revolutions depended also upon the time 
the rattler was run, and this varied. The weight of the foundry shot 
used and the size and condition of the pieces were whatever happened 
to be in use in the foundry where the test was made, though this was 
sometimes varied by using what the individual making the tests con¬ 
sidered to be better. Some engineers were somewhat more definite and 
specified that a given weight of miscellaneous foundry shot was to be 
used. In 1896, H. J. Burt* reported that specifications from fifteen 
cities showed the following ranges in the dimensions of the rattler and 
conditions of the test: Length of rattler, 24 to 54 inches; diameter, 15 
to 40 inches; speed, revolutions per minute, 15 to 45; duration of test, 
30 to 360 minutes; weight of iron in the charge, 50 to 800 pounds; 
Loss permissable in one hour, 3 to 10 per cent. These figures show some¬ 
thing of the variation in practice at that time. 

It is quite evident that this lack of uniformity was conducive to con¬ 
fusion. The engineer was not able to compare the brick which he ac¬ 
cepted with the material which the engineer of a neighboring city re¬ 
jected. The manufacturer could not tell definitely whether his product 


*The Technograph, University of Illinois, No. 10, p. 93. . 



TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GEADE PAYING BRICK. 


53 


would fill the requirements in a city where he had not furnished brick. 
There was considerable difference of opinion on the effectiveness of the 
tests specified in certain cities in determining the toughness and hard¬ 
ness of brick. The amount and nature of the foundry shot used in 
some cases rendered the test merely an abrasion test. Perhaps the 
greatest confusion was due to the lack of explicitness in the, specifica¬ 
tions. As an illustration the following example is cited. In i895 when 
the writer was engage by the city of Chicago to make tests of brick 
from thirty yards in several states to find what makes of brick came 
up to the requirement of the specifications that the loss in one hour 
test should not exceed 12 per cent, he asked for instructions on the size of 
rattler, speed, and amount and nature of the foundry shot to be used 
in the test, and was told that these matters had not been specified 
and that he was to use his.own judgment concerning them. Of course, 
in such cases manufacturers were not able to determine what grade of 
brick was wanted, and municipalities were uncertain about the quality 
of the pavement which they were putting down. 

A number of efforts were made to standardize the rattler test. One 
of the earliest attempts was made by Prof. Ira 0. Baker, in 1890, by 
subjecting brick which had seen service in a pavement and pieces of 
natural stones cut to standard form and size to the action of a rattler 
in which were also placed small pieces of scrap iron. This method was 
unsatisfactory on account of the trouble and expense of preparing the 
test pieces of natural stone and the lack of uniformity in the stone, as 
well as because as used it did not properly combine the two actions of 
impact and abrasion. Later, the same investigator made a series of tests 
using 2-inch cubes of brick and stone with a charge of foundry “stars,” 
but this method did not prove satisfactory. 

In 1895 the National Brick Manufacturers Association appointed 
a commission to investigate the subject of paving brick tests and to 
recommend standard methods for their conduct. This commission was 
'made up of representative men, and they had unusual facilities for their 
investigation. The work done marked a distinct advance in the testing 
of paving brick. The report of this commission* made in February, 
1897, contains much valuable data on the subject of testing paving brick. 
The investigation of the rattler test was made by Prof. Edward Orton, 
Jr., of Ohio'State University. His experiments were conducted upon 
Canton red granite repressed brick pavers, burned so as to have a high 
degree of uniformity. These brick were of as high quality as is gen¬ 
erally available for paving purposes. A general summary of the results 
of Professor Orton's investigation of the rattler test may prove of 
interest in this discussion. 

Tests were made with charges of foundry shot made up of small 
scraps which had been used in a foundry as an abrasive to clean rough 
castings. These pieces composing the foundry shot were small, aver¬ 
aging less than one-half pound and in no case being more than one and 
one-half pounds. The resulting loss was small and, of course, was due 


♦Pamphlet published by T. A. Randall & Co., Indianapolis, Ind. 



54 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


almost wholly to abrasive action, the impact effect being very slight. 
Cast-iron bricks weighing approximately seven pounds each were next 
used in the rattler. Charges of these cast-iron shot equivalent to 10, 15, 
20 and 25 per cent of the volume of the rattler were tried, five paving 
brick being tested each time. The bricks subjected to this test sustained 
comparatively little loss by abrasion, the principal loss being by break¬ 
ing and chipping. The effect of the impact with these heavy shot was 
very severe. Without trying another size of shot or attempting to 
blend the abrasive and impact effect by means of a mixture of sizes, the 
use of iron was abandoned, though Professor Orton felt that its cheap¬ 
ness, its long life, and its uniformity at all parts of the country would 
make it particularly suited for a standard filling if its action as an 
abrasive were favorable. 

Tests were then made using natural stone of .the general size of pav¬ 
ing brick. It was found that limestone, sandstone, and granite were 
as variable in their losses as are brick, that the results obtained with 
the paving brick when tested with blocks of stone were exceedingly 
erratic, and that the accompanying expense and trouble themselves 
rendered this method unacceptable. 

Tests were made with paving brick alone in the rattler, no other 
abrasive or filling material being used. After an elaborate set of tests 
made with a few of determining the best speed, size of charge, etc., Pro¬ 
fessor Orton reported that with brick alone in a rattler of 28-in. diameter 
the volume of the charge of brick should be from 10 to 15% of the vol¬ 
ume of the rattler, the test should be continued for at least 1500 revolu¬ 
tions, that the speed should be between 24 and 36 revolutions per min¬ 
ute, and that the length of the rattling chamber should not be less than 
18 inches. These conditions were found to give the least variation in 
results, the most severe wear, and to be the most convenient. 

The commission also had the advantage of the tests made by Mr. 
E. F. Harrington, of the testing department of the city of St. Louis, 
which were along the same lines and gave confirmatory evidence. Pro¬ 
fessor Orton’s report submitted specifications for the conducting of a 
standard rattler test and these were adopted by the commission almost 
without modification. These specifications are now known as the old 
National Brick Manufacturers Association test and sometimes as Orton’s 
test. The making of a standard for the size and speed of rattler and 
for the charge was a great step in advance, but the peculiar feature of 
the test, the use of brick alone in the rattler, did not prove to be a 
fortunate arrangement, as it was soon shown that this test failed to 
discriminate to a sufficient degree between good and poor paving brick. 
This feature has since been eliminated, and a definite charge of cast- 
iron shot is now used in the standard test. However, as its reproduction 
here may make it convenient for reference for some, the specifications 
adopted by the Paving Brick Commission of the National Brick Man¬ 
ufacturers Association are here given. 


TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GRADE PAYING BRICK. 


55 


ORIGINAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR A STANDARD METHOD OF CON¬ 
DUCTING THE RATTLER TEST FOR PAVING BRICK. (KNOWN AS 
THE OLD N. B. M. A. TEST OR ORTON’S TEST). 

• 

I. Dimensions of the Machine. 

The standard machine shall be 28 inches in diameter and 20 inches in 
length, measured inside the rattling chamber. 

Other machines may be used varying in diameter between 26 and 30 inches, 
and in length from 18 to 24 inches, but if this is done a record of it must be 
attached to official report. Long rattlers may be cut up into sections of suit¬ 
able length by the insertion of an iron diaphgram at the proper point. 

II. Construction of the Machine. 

The barrel shall be supported on trunnions at either end; in no^ case shall 
a shaft pass through the rattling chamber. The cross section of the barrel 
shall be a regular polygon, having fourteen sides. The heads and staves 

shall be composed of gray cast iron, not chilled or case hardened. There- 

shall be a space of one-fourth of an inch between the staves for the escape 

of dust and small pieces of waste. Other machines may be used having- 

from twelve to sixteen staves, with openings from one-eighth to three-eighths 
of an inch between staves, but if this is done a record of it must be attached 
to the official report of the test. 

III. Composition of tile Charge. 

All tests must be executed on charges composed of one kind of material at 
a time. No test shall be considered official where two or more different 
bricks or materials have been used to compose a charge. 

IV. Quantity of the Charge. 

The quantity of the charge shall be estimated by its bulk and not its 
weight. The bulk of the standard charge shall be equal to 15 per cent of the 
cubic contents of the rattling chamber, and the number of whole brick whose 
united volume comes nearest to this amount shall constitute a charge. 

V. Revolutions of the Charge. 

The number of revolutions for a standard test shall be 1,800 and the speed 
of rotation shall be 30 per minute. The belt power shall be sufficient To 
rotate the rattler at the same speed, whether charged or empty. Other speeds 
of rotation between 24 and 36 revolutions per minute may be used, but if 
this is done a record of it must be attached to the official report. 

VI. Condition of the Charge. 

The bricks composing a charge shall be dry and clean, and as nearly as 
possible in the condition in which they are drawn from the kiln. 

VII. The Calculation of the Results. 

The loss shall be calculated in per cents of the weight of the dry brick com¬ 
posing the charge, and no result shall be considered as official unless it is 
the average of two distinct and complete tests, made on separate charges of 
brick. ^ 

The abandonment of cast-iron shot as a feature of the rattler test 
was not in accord with the experience of others, and many engineers 
felt that it was a mistake. The results of tests made independently of 
the Paving Brick Commission pointed to this conclusion. The use of 
high grade brick only in the N". B. M. A. investigation of this new 
form of test was itself an element of weakness and a very bad feature 
as it proved to be. 

Among experiments which threw some light on the discussion which 
came up about the efficacy of the new test were those conducted at the 


56 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


University of Illinois from 1895 to 1899 under the direction of the 
writer to determine the. best composition of the rattling material. The 
investigation showed that shot composed of small pieces gave an effect 
which was almost wholly abrasive and that the heavier cast-iron shot pro¬ 
duced a spalling and breaking effect which was altogether too severe. It 
was felt that the rattler test should include the effect of both abrasion and 
impact, and a series of tests were made to determine what mixture of 
two sizes of shot would give the best combined effect of impact and 
abrasion, such as would approximate to the wear of brick in service in 
the street. The tests were conducted principally with a rattler 24-in. in 
diameter and 36-in. long. The small shot were lxl%x234-in. with 
rounded e'dges and weighed about 1 pound each. The large shot were 
2 : *4x3%x5 1 / 4-in. with edges rounded to V 2 -im radius, and weighed 
about 8 pounds each. From the results of the experiments it was con¬ 
cluded that for the 24x36-in. rattler, 150 pounds of 8-pound shot and 
150 pounds of 1-pound shot gave results with a satisfactory proportion 
of abrasion and impact. When a rattler 18-in. long was used, one-half of 
this charge was selected. The speed was about twenty revolutions per 
minute. Twelve brick were used in the full rattler and six in the half. 
The test was conducted for 1800 revolutions. These tests were reported 
to the Illinois Society of Engineers and Surveyors, and were described 
in an article on standard methods of tests of paving brick printed in 
The Technograph,* and reprinted in a number of technical journals. 
The tests brought out the facts that a combination of large and small 
shot give a test which will provide both impact and abrasive effects to 
any degree and that such a test will distinguish soft from hard brick 
to a fair degree. 

The investigations by the writer also called attention to the fact that 
the test then adopted by the National Brick Manufacturers Association, 
using brick alone in the rattler, was defective in that it failed to dis¬ 
tinguish in any marked degree between hard brick and soft brick. 
Objections were also made in various quarters. In some tests reported 
at that time, brick called by the maker as entirely too soft for paving 
purposes gave a smaller loss than the selected paving brick of the same 
manufacturer. In another test, three makes of brick of the same gen¬ 
eral quality made practically the same showing by other methods of test¬ 
ing, while by the National Brick Manufacturers Association, one brick 
lost less than two-thirds of that lost by either of the other two. It was 
also stated that in some instances the test gave as good standing to an 
inferior brick as to a superior paving brick. Soft brick soon broke in 
the rattler, and thereafter the loss was lighter, so that the final results 
"were likely to be lower than would be expected from the apparent quality 
of the brick. In general, the test was not very efficient in measuring 
the toughness of brick. It seems that in the investigations conducted by 
Professor Orton the use of only one quality of brick, and that a high 
grade paver, did not permit the real deficiencies of the test to be 
discovered. The discussion of this test created wide-spread interest. 
Finally, as a result of a paper presented at the meeting of the Na- 


*The Technograph No. 12, University of Illinois. 



TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GEADE PAVING BRICK. 


57 


tional Brick Manufacturers Association in 1899, the association asked 
Professor Orton to make a further investigation of the subject. 

The report'of this second investigation, made by Professor Orton, as 
well as, of the reports of tests made with the rattler designed by G-omer 
Jones, were submitted in January, 1900, to a committee consisting of 
Messrs. D. V. Purington, J. L. Hegley, H. A. Wheeler, Gomer Jones, 
Edward Orton, Jr., J. B. Johnson, and A. N. Talbot, which committee 
had been authorized to discuss these reports for the National Brick 
Manufacturers Association. In the Jones rattler a few brick were 
clamped edgewise in pockets around the inside surface of a cylindrical 
rattler and 1%-in. cubes of cast-iron were used for the impact and 
abrading material. The report of Professor Orton’s tests showed that 
the device of Mr. Jones embodied several objectionable features and the 
committee concluded that while the machine might appeal to the public 
as in a sense representing conditions of wear in the street and while 
the reports show that the machine is distinctly more sensitive in indicat¬ 
ing the softer grades of brick, the variable amount of surface exposed 
on the brick and the discordant results^ coming from variations in sizes, 
as well as other defects of the machine, rendered it less satisfactory 
as a general matter of testing than the rattler already in use. The 
series of tests with the standard rattler reported by Professor Orton 
enabled a comparison to be made between the National Brick Manu¬ 
facturers Association method in which brick alone were placed in the 
rattler and the method recommended by the writer which involved the 
use of cast-iron shot of two sizes. The investigation included the effect 
of variation in quality of brick, the effect of a change in the amount of 
shot, the effect of a variation in the proportion of small and large shot, 
the effect of the speed of the rattler and the effect of size of the brick 
themselves. The committee in their report advised the National Brick 
Manufacturers Association to abandon the old N. B. M. A. test and to 
adopt in its place the test with cast-iron shot of two sizes, definite pro¬ 
portions of small and large shot and of the total charge being adopted. 
This report was presented to the association in February, 1900, and 
the association changed its standard method of test to conform with 
the specifications recommended by the committee. It also accepted the 
recommendation that further tests and investigations be made. 

The idea of clamping the brick in position seemed a promising one 
and soon after this the writer constructed a rattler in which the brick 
were securely held around the circumference of a cylinder, their inner 
faces thereby forming the surface of the cylinder. This machine will 
be described under the head of .“Talbot-Jones Rattler Test.” During 
the first months of 1901, Professor Orton experimented with this 
machine and reported the results of the tests together with the results 
of tests made with the standard rattler to a committee consisting of 
J. B. Johnson, W. K. Hatt, A. Marston, and A. N. Talbot, in August, 
1901. This committee reported and recommended a continuance of the 
standard adopted in 1900, on the grounds that it is somewhat cheaper 
and simpler than the ordinary rattler in general use, and that the find¬ 
ings by the new N. B. M. A. standard tests are in accord with the 
results’ of other tests and with the results of the use of the paving 


58 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


Lbull. no. 9 


brick in actual service. The committee on Technical Investigation of 
the IN ational Brick Manufacturers Association accepted this report and 
by virtue of the authority vested in them by the association reaffirmed 
the method of tests adopted in February, 1900, as the standard rattler 
test of the National Brick Manufacturers Association. 

National Brick Manufacturers Standard Rattler Test .—The specifica¬ 
tions for the present National Brick Manufacturers Association stand¬ 
ard rattler test thus finally adopted are here given in full. It will be 
seen that they include requirements for the dimensions of the rattler 
chamber and the number of its sides, for the composition of the charge 
in the number of the paving brick or blocks and the amount of the cast- 
iron shot and the sizes and form of the shot to be used, for the speed 
of the rattler, for the number of revolutions for a test, for the con¬ 
dition of the brick, and for the method of calculation of the results. 


AMENDED SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE RATTLER TEST. 
PRESENT N. B. M. A. TEST. 


1. Dimensions of the Machine .— The standard machine shall be 28 inches 
in diameter and 20 inches in length, measured inside the rattling chamber. 

Other machines may be used, varying in diameter between 26 and 30 inches 
and in length from 18 to 24 inches, hut if this is done, a record of it must 
be attached to the official report. Long rattlers must be cut up into sections 
of suitable length by the insertion of an iron diaphgram at the proper point. 

2. Construction of the Machine — The barrel may be driven by trunnions' at 
one or both ends, or by rollers underneath, but in no case shall a shaft pass 
through the rattler chamber. The cross section of the barrel shall be a reg¬ 
ular polygon, having fourteen sides. The heads shall be composed of gray 
cast-iron, not chilled nor case-hardened. The staves shall preferably be com¬ 
posed of steel plates, as cast-iron peans and ultimately breaks under the 
wearing action on the inside. There shall be a space of one-fourth of an 
inch between the staves for the escape of the dust and small pieces of waste. 

Other machines may be used having from twelve to sixteen staves, with 
openings from one-eighth to three-eighths of an inch between staves but if 
this is done a record of it must be attached to the official report of the test. 

3. Composition of the Charge .— All tests must be executed on charges 
containing but one make of paving material at a time. The charge shall 
be composed of the brick to be tested and iron abrasive material. The brick 
charge shall consist of that number of whole bricks or blocks whose com¬ 
bined volume most nearly amounts to 1,000 cubic inches, or 8 per cent of the 
content of the rattling chamber. (Nine, ten, or eleven are the number re¬ 
quired for the ordinary sizes on the market). The abrasive charge shall 
consist of 300 pounds of shot made of ordinary machinery cast-iron. This 
shot shall be of two sizes, as described below, and the shot charge shall be 
composed of one-fourth (75 lb.) of the larger size and three-fourths (225 lb ) 
of the smaller size. 

4. Size of the Shot . The larger size shall weigh about seven and one- 
half pounds and be about two and one-half inches square and four and one- 
half inches long, with slightly rounded edges. The smaller size shall be one 
and one-half inch cubes, weighing about seven-eighths of a pound each with 
square corners and edges. The individual shot shall be replaced by new ones 
when they have lost one-tenth of their original weight. 











STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. Bull. No. 



The Talbot-Jones Rattler 












TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GRADE PAVING BRICK. 


59 


5. Revolutions of the Charge. —The number of revolutions of the Standard 
test shall be 1,800, and the speed of rotation shall not fall below 28 nor ex¬ 
ceed 30 per minute. The belt power shall be sufficient to rotate the rattler 
at the same speed whether charged or empty. 

6. Condition of the Charge. —The bricks composing a charge shall be 
thoroughly dried before making the test. 

7. The Calculation of the Results. —The loss shall be calculated in per¬ 
centages of the weight of the dry brick composing the charge, and no result 
shall be considered as official unless it is the average of two distinct and com¬ 
plete tests, made on separate charges of brick. 

Talbot-Jones Rattler Test .-—In the machine constructed by the writer 
in 1900 (shown in Plate 2) and named “The Talbot-Jones Rattler” by 
the committee of expert engineers, the head which forms one end of 
the rattling cylinder overhangs the frame of the machine. The ends 
of the brick are placed so as to abut on this head and are securely 
clamped by bolts so that their inner faces form the concave surface of the 
rattler cylinder. Spacers of wood of triangular or trapezoidal form are 
placed between the brick to keep them a fixed distance apart and to 
aid in holding the brick in place. An end, or second head of wood,or 
of wire screen, is bolted on to close the cylinder. A sheet of metal is 
fastened to the head of the machine around the outside of the circle 
of brick and holds the brick in place during the process of inserting them 
and assists in taking the jar in making the test. . In the original form 
this band was in a fixed position and since brick vary in thickness it was 
necessary to vary the spacing in order to divide up the space between 
the bricks throughout the entire circle. In the tests made by Professor 
Orton with this machine the brick were spaced, one inch or more apart. 
This wide spacing and the variation found in filling the circle with 
bricks of different thickness seemed undesirable. The machine has now 
been modified so that the circle is adjustable and the spacing may be 
made uniform throughout the entire circumference. The average in¬ 
ternal diameter of this chamber is 28 inches and the machine may be 
adjusted from 27%-in. to 28%-in. This permits a full ring to be 
made with an even spacing and any thickness of brick. It is recom¬ 
mended that the space between brick be made %-in. Other details of the 
machine are that the end of the band lacks about inch of being in 
contact with the head of the machine, this space being left for the 
escape of dust and chips; the heads of the bolts lie in a T-shaped groove 
in the head of the machine so that they are readily adjustable; the cen¬ 
tral portion of the head is recessed about % inches so that the iron shot 
may strike the brick for their full length; the cover of the cylinder for 
the same reason is held away from the outer ends of the brick. 

It will be seen that in this rattler the brick themselves form the outer 
surface of the rattling chamber and are laid at right angles to the 
direction of action of the shot, and that one face of the brick receives 
the wear about as it does in the street. The shot gives the abrading and 
grinding and impact effect. In many ways the test resembles the wear 
of brick in the street; it naturally appeals to the mind as resembling 
and approximating the wear in the street. 

This method of testing is a promising one in many directions. The 
machine is a special one, but its cost is hardly more than the standard 


60 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


rattler. Its use requires but little more skill. The time taken in 
charging the machine and in making the test is greater, so that the 
cost of a test by the Talbot-Jones process would be somewhat more than 
with the H. B. M. A. standard. If, however, it should be found to 
define the wearing qualities of a brick more definitely and with greater 
accuracy than does the ordinary rattler, these features would not 
interfere with its adoption. While considerable experimental work has 
been done With this machine, it is felt that the investigation has not pro¬ 
ceeded far enough to standardize it nor to show its qualifications suffi¬ 
ciently to recommend it for adoption as a standard for testing purposes. 
The writer has been unable to carry on the necessary investigations, but 
he hopes that full tests may be made to determine its usefulness. All 
the tests which have been made are favorable to its efficiency and adapt¬ 
ability for general testing purposes. The uniformity of conditions for 
the tests and the opportunity to determine relative wear of individual 
brick are among the attractive features. 

ABSORPTION TEST. 

There has been a change of view in reference to the value, applicability, 
and purpose of the absorption test. In the early experience with brick 
pavement, soft and porous brick were used and the fear was expressed 
that the brick would crumble and disintegrate under the effect of a re¬ 



peated freezing and thawing, and an absorption test with an arbitrary 
limit was included in the specifications. This test was used without full 
information of the properties of the brick and frequently without good 
judgment. The experience of years and tests made by repeatedly freez¬ 
ing and thawing bricks have established the fact that the action of 
freezing and thawing is not likely to disintegrate brick of a high grade 
which will pass the requirements' of other tests. This statement should 
not be interpreted to mean that the action of frost and traffic together 
will not cause disintegration of brick which, when dry and cold, would 
resist the wear of the traffic fairly well. The improper use of the ab- 





































TALBOT] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GRADE PAVING BRICK. 


61 


sorption test resulted in an indiscriminate condemnation of it and also 
in a lack of appreciation of its value and usefulness as an auxiliary test 
and as a means for studying properties of the brick. The absorption 
test is a valuable adjunct for use in interpreting the results of the 
rattler and cross breaking tests and in studying the peculiarities of 
the particular make of brick which will be put into a pavement. 

A good paving brick will absorb water quite slowly, the rate of 
absorption varying from hour to hour. Fig. 1 shows the rate of' 
absorption through the period of some days, as given by Mr. F. F. Har¬ 
rington. If the outside of the brick is more dense than the interior 
the rate of absorption is still slower. A broken brick or a rattled brick 
will absorb water more readily than whole brick for this reason, and 
such brick should be selected for the test. In some tests the brick 
have been partially submerged for some time to allow the escape of air. 
The absorption of water is more rapid in the beginning, is quite slow 
after 24 hours, and still slower after 48 hours. The absolute value of 
the absorption power is not required, and for comparative purposes the 
result at the end of 24 hours, or better, at the end of 48 hours, will be 
sufficient. Brick which absorb but a small part of their final amount 
are usually so dense that the total absorption would be very small and the 
variation in value for such brick will not affect comparisons. Since 
brick in their usual condition contain some moisture, the sample should 
be dried for- several hours at a temperature at or above the boiling 
point of water. The method given below requires 48 hours, but this 
protracted period seems unnecessary for ordinary purposes. 

The absorption test should be conducted under the following condi¬ 
tions: The test will be made on five brick which have been exposed 
to the action of the rattler, or if these are not available, on five bricl^- 
which have been broken into halves. The brick shall be dried at a 
temperature of 200° to 300° F. for 24 hours and then after weighing 
shall be immersed in water for 48 hours. Before reweighing the brick, 
surplus water shall be wiped from its surface. The absorption shall be 
expressed in per cents of the dry weight of the brick. 

The idea that low absorption is a guaranty of excellency of the wear¬ 
ing qualities of paving brick was held by engineers for many years. 
As brick are burned in the kiln the amount of their porosity becomes 
less and less until a point is reached when another change occurs and 
further burning will not decrease the porosity. The absorption test may 
determine or distinguish underburned brick, but overbumed brick may 
not give a test much different from brick which have received the best 
degree of burning. The best limits for absorption will vary with the 
clay and method of manufacture and will have to be determined for every 
make of brick. This determination may be made by comparison with 
the results of other tests and by experience with the brick. In other 
words, no general limits can be placed for the absorption test, but 
special limits may be specified for particular makes of bricks used in 
any city. For a given brick, then, it may be said that the absorption 
test is able to distinguish underburned brick, and that it will be helpful 
in determining the length of burning permissible with a given grade 
and make of brick. 


62 


PAVING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


Tbuxl. no. 9 


CRUSHING TEST. 

Tests for crushing strength are open to the objection that the results 
obtained are extremely variable, especially as the method of making the 
test is not uniform. When the faces of the test cubes are ground accur- 
ately to plane surfaces, the results with high-grade paving brick are 
very high, running up to 20,000 pounds per square inch. The use of 
prepared test cubes makes an expensive and slow method of testing. 
Whole brick or half brick are tested on edge, sometimes with the bear¬ 
ing faces ground and in other cases not. If not ground, the faces may 
be bedded in plaster of Paris and crushed after the plaster has fully 
set, or the faces may be bedded in card-board or heavy paper. The last 
named method of testing is more readily made and if at least five speci¬ 
mens are tested the average may be expected to give representative re¬ 
sults. In the tests described in this paper, half bricks were tested, 
several thicknesses of heavy building paper being used as bedding plates. 
Soft brick will give results as low as 1,000 pounds per square inch, when 
tested by this method. Occasionally a brick will run as high as 18,000 
pounds per square inch. It may be expected that overburned or poor 
paving brick will stand a load up to 3,000 pounds per square inch. 
Good pavers will range between 6,000 and 12,000 pounds per square 
inch. 

Crushing strength is a desirable property in a paving brick. The 
argument that such heavy loads' as are indicated by crushing values will 
not come upon the brick and that the brick will not be crushed in the 
street is a negative one. There is a relation between crushing strength 
and hardness. The stronger the brick the better it will resist wear in 
the pavement. This quality of strength is particularly desirable where 
pavement is subject to heavy traffic. In comparing two bricks giving 
about the same rattler results, the one wi+h high crushing strength 
will stand heavy traffic much better than the weaker one. For light 
traffic high crushing strength is not essential. It is further true that 
the crushing test throws light on other physical properties of a brick 
and is a source of evidence in the study of quality. Generally speak¬ 
ing, however, this test is not of a character to be included in specifica¬ 
tions, but it is of value in connection with the study of the properties 
of different bricks. It will be seen, also, that the cross breaking test 
gives information which may permit it to take the place of the crush¬ 
ing test. 

CROSS-BREAKING TEST. 

The cross-breaking test is for the purpose of determining the general 
strength of the brick; incidentally it gives evidence of the toughness 
and the hardness of the brick. It indicates the ability to resist cross¬ 
breaking, twisting, or spalling by concentrated loads and is an index 
of the crushing strength of the brick. 

Two objections to this test have at times been raised; (1) that the 
quality indicated by the test is not needed in a paving brick, and (2) 
that the. results of the cross-breaking test are variable and even erratic. 
It is believed, however, that the test is helpful in judging of the quality 
and strength and toughness required of a good brick. It may be suffi- 

























































































































STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. 


CO 

4 

Ah 


05 

o 

£ 

4 

4 

4 

PQ 



Brick being- tested for cross-breaking strength 















63 


TALBOT] QUALITIES OF HIGH GEADE PAYING BEICK. 


cient to specify only a medium value for the modulus of rupture., and 
yet a brick with a fairly high value will be of higher grade. The brick 
which does not have the quality of high resistance to cross-breaking is 
likely to spall or break in the street and not to withstand traffic, even 
though the rattler test may show a low loss. Brick which have the tough¬ 
ness and strength which go with a good modulus of rupture may show a 
somewhat higher loss by the rattler and yet give better results in the 
street than other brick whose rattler losses are lower. It must be ex¬ 
pected that there will he a variation in the results shown in tests of 
individual brick, for quality varies considerably in ordinary paving 
brick. The rattler tests of individual brick vary widely. Much of the 
variation which has been reported in the results of cross-breaking tests 
is due to the method of making the test commonly employed. It is be¬ 
lieved by the writer that the method here given reduces the variation due 
to the method to a reasonable amount and that the variation now found 
represents quite closely the lack of uniformity in the brick. With the 
test made in the manner here described cross-breaking tests, if properly 
judged, become a valuable adjunct in the determination of the quali¬ 
ties of a paving brick. 

Brick should be tested as a beam on edge with a span of 6 inches and 
with the load applied at the middle of the span. The modulus of rup¬ 
ture is determined by the usual formula: 



W1 

TkB 


( 1 ) 


where W is the load applied, l is the span, b is the breadth oFthe brick, 
and d the depth. 

Plate 3 gives a view of a brick being tested, and Fig. 32 shows details. 



Fig. 2. Arrangement for testing cross-breaking strength of brick. 







64 PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. [bull. no. 9 

Attention is called to the use of steel bearing plates and to the use of the 
wooden block. The narrow soft steel plate gives a bedding on the 
brick which is slightly adjusting and overcomes the tendency to cutting. 
The knife edges are slightly curved in the direction of their length, 
to allow for irregularities or warping in the brick. The lower knife 
edges rest upon a wooden block which is curved laterally somewhat to 
allow a rocking movement. The main purpose of the wooden block, 
however, is to allow adjustment by its compression so that the load 
will be more evenly distributed and so that the work of applying the load 
and making the test will extend over a longer, time. This arrangement 
allows a more accurate determination of the amount of the load and 
greater freedom in making the test. The results of the tests which are 
discussed later on, show that this method gives results well within the 
range of uniformity of the brick. Eequirements for the cross-breaking 
test should specify that the brick be tested on edge, that the span be 
6 inches, that the knife edges be slightly curved in the direction of their 
length, say with a radius of 20 inches, and that the test be made upon 
a wooden block similar to the one shown. 


SPECIFIC GRAVITY. 


The test for specific gravity gives general information but is not 
of service for general use. The specific gravity of a brick depends upon 
the material, the method of making, and the amount of burning. For 
certain clays and processes the specific gravity of a brick depends upon 
the amount of burning, up to a certain point, which varies with differ¬ 
ent clays.-’ A dense, heavy brick has a high specific gravity. The range 
of specific gravity for shale paving brick is from 2.2 to 2.4. In mak¬ 
ing tests of specific gravity, the amount of water absorbed by the brick 
must be allowed for. The brick is weighed in air and then in water 
and again in air. Then specific gravity may be determined bv the 
W 


formula, -, where W is the weight of the 

W'—'W" 


dry brick, W 1 is the 


weight of the saturated brick in air, and W" is the weight of the satur¬ 
ated brick in water. 


Discussion of Tests and Comparison of Qualities. 

A comparison of the various tests may be made by studying the 
results of the extensive series of tests of brick of a wide range*of char¬ 
acter and quality made at. the University of Illinois for the Department 
of Ceramics and State Geological Survey. These tests are more fully 
reported elsewhere. The brick were obtained from twenty-seven man¬ 
ufacturers in the states of Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, Missouri, and Kan¬ 
sas. From one to five grades of each make of brick were obtained. 
Duplicate rattler tests were made for each grade, and five or more 
brick were tested in cross-breaking and in crushing for each grade. 
The bricks used in the tests were generally selected and graded at the 
yards by a representative of the Ceramics Department, who was skilled 



TALBOT.] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GEADE PAYING BRICK. 


65 


in selecting and grading brick. When more than' one grade was ob¬ 
tained, the first selection made was the best grade for paving pur¬ 
poses, according to the judgment of the representative, care being 
taken not to select too hard burned a brick. A grade harder or some¬ 
what overburned and one softer or even underburned were selected. 
When there seemed to be an opportunity for error in judgment, inter¬ 
mediate grades slightly harder or softer than the first were also picked 
out. The N. B. M. A. Standard rattler test was used, and the other 
tests were made by the methods already described. Battled brick were 
used in the absorption tests. 

The general results of these tests are plotted in Big. 3. The three 
makes of brick on which transverse and crushing tests were not made 
are not included in this diagram. The average for the tests on a par¬ 
ticular grade are shown. The brick were placed on the diagram gen¬ 
erally in the order of the rattler loss, the grade which gave the lowest 
rattler loss being used to fix the order of any make of brick. The 
crushing strength is plotted in connection with the modulus of rupture, 
(cross-breaking test), to enable a ready comparison between these two 
tests to be made, the scale for the crushing strength being one-third 
of the actual value. The figures given with the modulus of rupture 
show the average variation of the modulus of rupture for the 
individual brick in any grade from the mean of the test on that grade as 
given in per cent of the mean value of the modulus of rupture. In 
studying this diagram attention should be given to the amount of 
variation in the absorption test for each make of brick, to the range in 
the amount of absorption producing little change in the desirable qual¬ 
ities in some brick and to the rapid change in quality for small changes 
in absorption for others, and to the relation between the rattler test 
and the other tests. 

Attention is called to the following particulars shown on the diagrams. 

Brick-No. 2 .—A range of absorption from %% to 3% gives an excellent 
quality of brick, as shown by the rattler tests, the cross bending test, and 
the crushing test. Even with 6% absorption this brick gives a good rattler 
test and a high crushing strength. It is apparent that there may be con¬ 
siderable variety of burning with this brick and yet secure a good article, 
providing, of course, that the heat treatment is otherwise suitable. 

Brick No. 5 .—In this make a change in the absorption amount is accom¬ 
panied by a considerable change in the quality of the brick as shown by the 
rattler test and the other tests. Much care must then be used in selecting 
the right degree of burning. 

Brick No. 7 .-—This is a fire clay brick and its strength can not well be com¬ 
pared with the other brick. It seems probable that the smoothness of this 
material gives it a higher rating in the rattler test than the brick should 
have. 

Brick No. 10 .—In this brick the grading for hardness as made secured a 
brick with but a small range in the absorption test, three grades varying less 
than 1% in the absorption test. All or these were of very good quality. 

Brick No. 12 .—Absorption up to 5% has little effect upon the quality of the 
brick, the cross-breaking strength being good for the grade having 5 per cent 
absorption. The overburned brick is of poorer quality. The rangd in absorp¬ 
tion from one to five per cent allows considerable latitude in the selection of 
the brick. 

Brick No. 15 .—in this brick the amount of burning seems to affect the 
quality very much and it is difficult to say just what range of absorption is 

—5 G- 


66 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 


allowable. 3%% absorption accompanies a fairly good brick, but variations 
on either side of this are very detrimental to the quality. The crushing and 
cross breaking tests for this brick are low. All of these conditions are indi¬ 
cations of an undesirable brick for use as they would be delivered on the 
street. 

Brick No. 'This brick has low cross breaking and high absorption. The 

samples tested do not indicate a first class brick. 

Brick No. id.-^This brick permits a wide range of burning without much 
change in its quality. 

The results of the absorption test show that there is generally little 
or no difference in the amount of water absorbed in overburned brick and 




A Off: —Modulus of Rupture shown ; j O ush'wg Strength shown ^ 
The values given for Crushing Strength are to be multiplied by 3 

Fig. 3—Results of Tests of Paving Brick. 





























































TALBOT.] 


QUALITIES OP HIGH GRADE PAYING BRICK. 


67 


well burned brick. This agrees, of course, with our knowledge of tha 
change which takes place at vitrification. The amount of variation in 
absorption between brick of different degrees of harness (of the same 
make) which show practically the same good wearing quality by all the 
other tests is of interest. A favorable or wide range of absorption for 
the same wearing qualities must be considered advantageous to the 
manufacturer and also to the consumer, both by reason of the wider 
latitude allowed in burning and also upon the ease of inspection on 
the street. Other brick like No. 10 give a considerable difference in 
appearance with Only a slight change in the qualities of the absorption 
test and without any marked change in the wearing qualities of the 
brick. The absorption test appears to. be of value in studying a given 
make of brick or in learning of its properties and giving information 
bearing upon the inspection of the brick delivered on the street. For 
any given make' of brick the specific range of absorption which will give 
a good article may be determined and required. 

The results show that generally the rattler test made a fair determin¬ 
ation of the quality of the brick, if we may judge by^ the appearance 
of the brick, the results of other tests, and the reputation of the brick. 
In some cases the rattler test gave a rank better than would be given 
by the character and appearance of the brick and by the results of the 
other tests. A few of the makes showed rather high rattler loss and gave 
a fairly good modulus of rupture and cross-breaking strength and 
uniformity, and some of these brick are reported to have given excellent 
service under light traffic. Brick 17, 18, 19, and 20 are in this class. 
The range of difference between that of a single test and the mean of 
the duplicate rattler tests averaged from about .5 to 1% for the better 
grades of brick, although in one ease the variation was as high as 1.8% 
from the mean. The variations are smaller than is usual in the rattler 
test, and attest the care in selecting the brick. The value of the crush¬ 
ing strength was generally between three and four times the modulus 
of rupture. There was a fairly close agreement between these two 
tests. A high value in one test was accompanied by increased values in 
the .other test. Generally speaking, it may be said that a value of 2,500 
pounds per square inch for the modulus of rupture and 7,500 pounds per 
square inch for the crushing strength may be expected in first class 
paving brick. Lower values like 2,000 and 6,000 pounds respectively, are 
not especially objectionable. In the cross-breaking test the variation 
in the values for individual bricks is of interest and in some respects this 
variation may be considered a measure of the uniformity of the brick. 
As already stated, the numbers given with the cross-breaking test in 
Fig. 33 show the average range of variation in the modulus of rupture for 
individual brick from the average modulus for the given grade expressed 
in per cent of the mean modulus of rupture. In other words, a range 
of 10 per cent means that if the difference between the modulus of rupture 
for each individual brick and the average modulus for that grade he 
expressed in per cents of this average modulus, the average of the re¬ 
sults for the given grade of brick will be 10 per cent. It will be noted that 


68 


PAYING BEICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


for the better grades of brick this range is within 12 per cent. Attention 
is called to the much greater variation in bricks No. 13, 15 , 16 and 17. 
Since uniformity of quality in a lot of brick is of considerable import¬ 
ance a test of this kind may be used to rate different makes of brick on 
the score of uniformity. 

It should be understood that the brick tested were much more nearly 
uniform in quality than would be obtained in taking brick at random 
from piles along the street, since the selection was made with a view to 
securing uniformity. The variation between duplicate rattler tests is 
therefore smaller than may be expected in tests of brick from the 
street, and the uniformity in the modulus is also greater. There was 
greater freedom from the accidental variations which frequently affect 
the rattler test. Although the rattler test was fairly discriminating in 
determining quality, the results must not be taken to indicate that the 
rattler test may be used to settle the exact order of various makes of 
brick with respect to wearing quality; it- should rather be considered 
a means of determining whether a brick is up to a required standard. 
The objection sometimes made that the rattler test does not easily permit 
determination of variation in individual bricks was not considered in 
the investigation, since so careful a selection of brick was made. The 
information given in the cross-breaking and absorption tests is valuable, 
and the usefulness of these tests is shown, particularly in connection 
with the study of the qualities of different grades of the same make of 
brick. 

The effect of size of the brick upon the loss found in the rattler was 
not included in these tests. It is established that the brick size will 
sustain a greater loss than the block size of the same grade and qual¬ 
ity. This excess is due to the greater relative exposure of the corners 
which chip off more or less, and to the greater proportional -wearing 
surface exposed in the brick size. The amount of this difference de¬ 
pends upon various conditions, but with good material the brick size may 
be expected to lose, say, 3 per cent more than the block size. Of course, 
only a part of this difference would show up in the wear of pavements 
constructed with brick of the two sizes. The effect of accidental differ¬ 
ences, or of variations in the quality of the shot, or of the smoothness 
or other conditions of the rattler was not studied, and will not be dis¬ 
cussed here. 

A study of Table II shows that the best grade of brick received in 
the first 450 revolutions of the rattler test from 47 to 53 per cent of the 
total loss and that the poorer grades lost during this stage a smaller per¬ 
centage of their total loss, as little as 30 per cent in some cases. Simil¬ 
arly at 900 revolutions, the better grades had received 67 to 77 per cent 
of their total loss, while the poorer grades had received a smaller propor¬ 
tion of their total loss. It seems that the better grades wear more slowly, 
comparatively, after the corners are rounded off; and the poorer grades’ 
continue to grind off or break up during the latter part of the test. 


TALBOT.] 


QUALITIES OE HIGH GEADE PAYING BRICK. 


69 


This extensive series of tests gives data on a wide range of brick and 
enables comparison to be made of a wide variety of conditions. It is val¬ 
uable for making a study of the properties of paving brick, as well as 
for making a comparison of the various tests and requirements for pav¬ 
ing brick. It will be seen from Fig. 3 that the best grades of brick 
in the first ten makes of brick, as shown by the samples tested, are of 
excellent quality and will make, a durable and satisfactory pavement. 
The remaining makes are less valuable as paving material, and be¬ 
sides many of these may not be judged from their general characteristics 
since they vary widely with slight changes in general appearance. The 
rattler test is a fairly satisfactory test for a particular make of brick 
in picking out the best degree of burning, etc., but in determining the 
ranking of several makes of brick it should be supplemented with the 
transverse and crushing tests. The absorption test is of value in study¬ 
ing the characteristics of a given make of brick and in judging of the 
effect of changes in the amount of burning. 

Reference may well be made to the information which a careful ob¬ 
server will obtain in such a series of tests by means of the ocular exam¬ 
ination of the structure and appearance of the brick. It suggests the 
desirability of a study by inspection of the structure and behavior of the 
brick in connection with the tests made on the brick to be used. 

Requirements eor Paving Brick. 

The rigidity of the requirements to be inserted in specifications or to 
be taken as standard in selecting paving brick for a street will depend 
upon the conditions under which the brick are to be used. The amount 
of traffic and the methods and details of construction used in the con¬ 
struction of the pavement, including such matters as the kind of filler 
used and the character of the foundation, will naturally have a bearing 
upon the requirements. A brick may be used on a street where there 
will be little traffic if it has sufficient weather-resisting qualities when 
it should be rejected for use with heavy traffic. A large amount of light 
traffic produces less wear than a much smaller amount of heavy traffic. 
In a pavement made with a high-grade cement filler the brick will be 
protected and the effect of spalling and impact may be much less than 
in a pavement with a sand filler. In a similar way the character of the 
foundation has to do with the grade of the brick to be chosen. For the 
purposes of this article it will be sufficient to divide traffic into four 
classes: (1) Very heavy traffic; (2).Heavy traffic; (3) Medium traf¬ 
fic; and (4) Light traffic. Very heavy traffic would be such as would 
occur in the business district of our large cities and in certain districts 
of smaller cities. Heavy traffic would include that found in the busi¬ 
ness districts of smaller cities. Medium traffic would be such as is 
found on the streets used as main thoroughfares in the smaller cities. 
Light traffic is such as is found in the remotest residence portions of 
the small cities, or streets not frequented. For very heavy traffic it is evi¬ 
dent' that only the very best brick should be used and that a heavy 


70 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


BULL. no. 9 


foundation and a high-grade filler to protect the brick should be used. 
For the other classes of traffic the requirements may be less rigid except 
that a high degree of uniformity in the brick should be maintained. 

The following limiting values for the requirements for brick for the 
several classes of traffic are suggested. They are given for the usual 
block size of brick. The maximum loss by the 1ST. B. M. A. standard 
rattler test: (1) Very heavy traffic, 15 per cent; (2) Heavy traffic, 17 
per cent; (3) Medium traffic, 21 per cent; (4) Light traffic, 24 per cent. 
For the brick size, 3 or 4 per cent may be added to the above limits, ex¬ 
cept that the brick size would not be used for very heavy traffic. No 
values are suggested for the Talbot-Jones rattler since the standardiza¬ 
tion of this machine is not yet complete. For the cross-breaking test the 
limits for the modulus of rupture may be made as follows: (1) Very 
heavy traffic, 3,000 pounds per square inch; (2) Heavy traffic, 2,500 
pounds per square inch; (3) Medium traffic, 2,000 pounds per square 
inch; (4) Light traffic, 1,500 pounds per square inch. It should be 
noted that these values are subject to modifications, according to re¬ 
quirements of traffic and conditions of the brick, and are not to be taken 
as iron-clad, limits. They are intended to apply to average samples of 
brick taken from piles along the street. The requirements for uniform¬ 
ity and the methods of determining this uniformity from a separate con¬ 
sideration. The limiting variation from the specified value for the 
modulus of rupture may be made a requirement. It is frequently pos¬ 
sible to select from the piles of brick of varying degrees of quality and 
make tests of these. In case that one of these grades representing a cer¬ 
tain percentage of the brick on a portion of the street, say, 5 or 10 per 
cent, falls below the requirements, they should be rejected. The matter 
of the selecting of these samples will be discusssd under “Inspection” 

Inspection of Paving Brick. 

In taking up the subject of inspection of paving brick it must be ad¬ 
mitted that inspection is generally an unsatisfactory topic to both con¬ 
tractor and municipality. Inspection is a difficult task requiring skilled 
judgment, expert knowledge, intelligent action, and ability of no mean 
order, as well as the qualities of tact, balance and horse sense. Men 
having these qualities and available for this purpose are rare. It is not 
so much that the politician desires to appoint a favored citizen or that 
the residents on a street feel that one of their number will best serve 
their interests. The municipal administrative officer will usually gladly 
waive these considerations if an inspector of the ideal type can be found. 
But the work for an inspector is spasmodic, and the season is short, and 
his importance in the constructive world is not yet so well established 
that he receives a high salary; we must expect ideal inspectors to be 
rare. However, the first requisite of paving brick inspection is a level¬ 
headed and wide-awake inspector, and it is to the interest of all con¬ 
cerned that this class of men be developed. 


TALBOT.] 


QUALITIES OF HIGH GRADE PAVING BRICK. 


71 


Inspection involves a study of the brick put on the street. An in¬ 
spector whose work came under my observation selected types of brick 
which he found—what he thought to be soft or hard or brown or brittle 
or red or black or what not—and made a lot of rattler tests and absorp¬ 
tion tests to determine the relative place of these various types and to aid 
his judgment in the inspection. This is a step in the right direction. It 
illustrates what was meant by saying that tests and requirements should 
be useful in educating inspector and citizen and contractor. 

The difficulties of inspection are increased by the way material is 
loaded on cars and piled on the streets. Good and poor are mixed to¬ 
gether indiscriminately, even when the change of quality is apparent as 
the wagon is loaded. Lack of uniformity is the bane of paving brick. 
May not the manufacturer remedy this in part at least, and place the 
mediocre brick on streets which want cheap brick and selected brick 
on streets which are willing to pay for a serviceable article? 

Evidently the inspection of paving brick and the selection of the- 
test brick form an important matter, and upon this depends, to a large 
extent, the quality of the brick used in the pavement. As it is an utter 
impossibility to test any considerable part of the brick, great care must 
he taken to select representative samples and samples which will show 
the variation of the materials To make severe requirements for the 
results of tests is only a part of the problem; the inspection must be 
efficient and thorough and wise in order that the results may be fair 
to both producer and consumer. 

It is obvious, then, that in addition to the making of standard tests 
the work of supervision of the pavement must include a fair and 
definite method of securing sample brick, a fair and general method for 
standards of rejection, and a way of throwing out imperfect brick dur¬ 
ing the time of laying the pavement and before the filler is applied. The- 
work of inspection, then, may be divided into the following: (1) A gen¬ 
eral inspection; (2) Rough culling of imperfect and inferior brick in 
pile and barrow; (3) A culling of inferior brick as they are about to be-, 
laid and immediately after they are laid. In the general inspection dif¬ 
ferent car loads or loads of the same quality should be considered to¬ 
gether. Samples representing as near as may be the average of the- 
brick of a given lot should be made by a man skilled in such work. 
If any considerable number of a poorer grade are to be found in any lot,, 
representative samples of these should be selected and tests made upon 
the selected brick. If the results of the tests of the average samples'- 
are not up to the requirements the whole lot of brick should be re¬ 
jected. If the results of the poorer grade are also not up to the re¬ 
quirements and this grade constitutes such a part of the whole lot that 
they are not likelv to be culled earefullv during laying, the lot should 
be rejected with the provision that they be culled and then reinspected.. 
In case the poorer brick in a. pile show vreat inferiority bv their ap¬ 
pearance it may be sufficient to permit workmen to cull the brick as 
they are loaded into barrows, but this arrangement is not usually very 


72 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


satisfactory. The culling of brick as they are laid in the street should 
be permitted only for such brick as show by their size, color, shape, or 
surface defects that they are inferior brick and there should be few 
enough of this class to enable satisfactory results to be obtained. With 
some makes of brick color or other appearance furnishes evidence of 
defect or of inferior grade, but in other makes little can be told by these 
methods and the quality can be established only by physical tests. 

Some time ago the writer made the suggestion that a desirable solu¬ 
tion of the inspection problem would be to have the brick inspected 
at the yards much as steel is inspected at the mills. This could be done 
by bureaus of inspection which would employ expert inspectors, as is 
done in the case of steel inspection, and this service would be paid for 
by the thousand of bricks inspected, or yard of pavement to be put down, 
instead of at a dollar and a half a day. The Bureau of Inspection 
would be given the requirements specified for the brick in the ordinance 
and the contract, and would certify to the quality of the brick. This 
inspection would not entirely relieve inspection on the street and in 
the pavement, for chipped, broken, and otherwise defective brick would 
still show up, but it would insure a better grade of brick and would 
make rejection of a poor lot of brick less objectionable to the producer, 
and if properly carried out would, in my opinion, result in great gain 
for both the manufacturer and the municipality. 

Altogether, inspection covers a multitude of details, involves ever¬ 
lasting vigilance, and entails patience and even temper, and the city 
which can get good inspection is indeed fortunate. A reputation for 
severe inspection is said to cause an undue increase in the bids for work, 
but this charge must not be accepted without consideration. Five cents 
a yard extra is only the cost of a year’s life of a pavement on a resi¬ 
dence street or six months on a business street, and who will not say 
that the difference in quality of brick may not make five or ten years, 
or even more, difference in the life of the "pavement ? Surely, adequate 
and judicious inspection pays for itself many times over. 

In this article the writer has not attempted to go into some of the 
details of testing and inspection; he has discussed principles governing 
the selection of the brick. Many questions arise between the producer 
and the consumer, and these may not always be decided according to 
numerical values of tests. It seems probable that brick will continue 
to be the principal material for street pavement in inland cities of 
Illinois, and the quality of the pavements may be improved if manu¬ 
facturers and municipalities agree on definite and trustworthy require¬ 
ments and tests and there is adequate and judicious inspection! An im¬ 
provement m quality and uniformity will be advantageous to producer 
nnd consumer. r 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICKS. 

GENERAL STATEMENT. 

The tests herein reported were made on paving brick from twenty- 
four paving brick factories in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri and 
Kansas. The samples of each make and grade were selected by repre¬ 
sentatives of the State Geological Survey at the yards of the factory. 
An effort was made to secure representative samples. The collectors 
were familiar with paving brick and their properties' and exercised care 
in the selection, and it is believed that the brick obtained are fairly 
representative of the product of the various factories at the time the 
selection was made. In many cases samples of two to five grades of 
brick, varying from the softer grade to very hard burned, were ob¬ 
tained. The letter at the beginning of the mark or designation of the 
various samples is the initial of the collector who selected the brick, 
and the letter at the end refers to the grade of burning of the brick, a 
being the softest burned lot. In some cases the a grade was consid¬ 
erably under-burned and in others it represented the best grade. 

The brick were held before making the tests, and the samples which 
were collected early in the spring were left for some time in their orig¬ 
inal packages in the open air and were subjected to dampness from the 
spring rains. However, before the tests were made, the brick were 
stacked openly under a tent and left for some time through hot dry 
weather so that each brick had ample opportunity to become dried 
throughout. The bricks which arrived last came direct from the kilns 
to the tent during dry weather without having become damp and were 
tested first. In this way the earlier brick were given from three to five 
weeks in which to dry. As the tent was open at the ends so that good 
circulation of air prevailed, the bricks had the opportunity to be thor¬ 
oughly dried. While no tests were made on the amount of moisture cofi- 
tained, it is thought that all the bricks were as dry as they could be under 
the average humidity conditions of. summer weather and without being 
dried in an oven. It is certain that the amount of moisture in the 
brick was as low as is required by the provisions of the 1ST. B. M. A. 
specifications for the rattler test. 

•The rattler test of the brick was made in the Road Laboratory of 
the Civil Engineering Department of the University of Illinois. The 
standard U. B. M. A. rattler of the Road Laboratory was used. The 
number of bricks and blocks agreed closely with the standard specifica- 


74 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


tions, although the relative cubical content of the rattler and the charge 
was not calculated for each lot, but the charge was varied with the judg¬ 
ment of the operator. At least 9 and not more than 10 blocks were con¬ 
sidered a charge, and at least 10 and not more than 12 of the brick 
size. The results of the rattler test are given in. Table I. The brick 
were weighed at the end of 450, 900, 1,350 and 1,800 revolutions and the 
corresponding losses are given in the tables. Table II shows the pro¬ 
portions of the final or total loss at the end of each of these periods 
given in per cent of the final loss, and Table III shows the percentage 
of the total loss for each of the four stages. 

The rattler tests were made under the direction of Mr. R. C. Purdy. 
Acknowledgment is made to Professor I. O. Baker of the Civil Engineer¬ 
ing Department of the University of Illinois for the facilities afforded 
in making the rattler tests. 

After the brick were rattled, five of each set, two from one chamber 
and three from the other chamber, were taken to the Laboratory of 
Applied Mechanics and the amount of absorption determined. The 
brick were not dried further, but the conditions were such that the 
amount of moisture present would have little effect upon the determina¬ 
tions reported. 

Prom the remainder of the brick not rattled, as many as could be 
spared up to ten of each kind were taken to the Laboratory of Applied 
Mechanics of the University of Illinois, and the transverse or cross¬ 
breaking test made upon them. The method of making this test is fully 
explained in the paper by Professor Talbot on the Quality of a High 
Grade Paving Brick and the Tests used in Determining Them. Crush¬ 
ing tests were made on half-brick placed flat-wise as described in the 
paper just referred to. The results for the absorption, transverse, and 
crushing tests, as furnished by Professor Talbot, are given in the tables. 
The average values for absorption, cross-breaking, and crushing are given 
in Table IV, and the detailed results follow in Table V. Transverse 
and crushing belts were not made on the Purington, Edwardsville and 
Streator Paving Brick Co. brick. 

The absorption and transverse tests were made by Mr. C. H. Pierce, 
Instructor in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, and the crushing tests 
by Mr. H. L. Whittemore, Associate in Applied Mechanics, and this 
work was under the direct supervision of Professor A. 1ST. Talbot. 

The general selection of the brick at the yards and the arrangements 
therefor were made by the State Geological Survey. Mr. R. C. Purdy, 
of the Department of Ceramics of the University of Illinois, had general 
supervision of the arrangements for testing. 


TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


75 


* 

TABLE I. 

N. B. M. A. Rattler Test. 



Grade 
of Brick. 

Average Total % 
Loss of Two 
Charges at End of 

Size nf Rrick 

Mark, Name of Brick. 

450 

Rev. 

900 

Rev. 

1350 

Rev. 

1800 
Rev. 

in cm. 


K3b Albion, Ill. 

Soft. 

18.5 

29.5 

38.4 

46.2 

22.5x10.5x8 

K3c Albion, Ill. 

Alley .. 

11.3 

17.5 

21.2 

24.6 

21x9.5x8 

K3d Albion, Ill. 

No. I paver. 

12.7 

19.0 

22.5 

24.9 

21x9.5x8 

K3e Albion, 111. 

Overburned. 

11.1 

18.6 

24.1 

26.4 

21x9.5x8 

Klb Alton, Ill. 

Soft burned. 

17.4 

28.6 

40.0 

46.1 

22x10x7 

Klc Alton, Ill. 

Alleys. 

13.3 

21.5 

28.2 

33.9 

21.5x9.5x7 

Kid Alton, Ill. 

No. I paver. 

8.4 

11.5 

14.1 

15.8 

21.5x9.5x7 

Kle Alton, Ill. 

Overburned .. 

9.4 

16.2 

21.8 

27.0 

B-IIa Atchison, Kan. 

No. 1 paver. 

28.0 

20x9.5x6.7 

R-IIh Atchison, Kan .... 

. .do. . 

13.6 

19.5 

23.9 

27.9 

K15b Bar Clay Co., Streator, Ill_ 

K15c Bar Clay Co., Streator, Ill_ 

K15d Bar Clay Co., Streator, Ill_ 

K15e Bar Clay Co., Streator, Ill — 
Kllb Brazil, Ind 

Soft .. 

14.5 

20.9 

25.4 

29.5 

21x9.5x8.5 

Alley .. 

10.2 

15.4 

19.0 

21.8 


No. 1 paver 

10.3 

13.9 

16.7 

18.4 


Overburned. 

Soft .. 

9.1 

28.9 

14.5 

45.1 

18.7 

56.8 

22.0 

67.1 

21x10x8 

24x11x8.5 

Kile Brazil, Ind. 

Alley.... 

13.6 

20.1 

25.3 

29.8 

23x10x8 

Klld Brazil, Ind. 

No 1 paver. 

13.5 

20.1 

24.5 

28.1 

22.5x10x8 

Kile Brazil, Ind. 

Overburned. 

14.5 

23.5 

30.8 

36.7 

23.5x10.5x8 

I-IIb Caney, Kan.. . 


9.7 

17.3 

22.0 

25.7 

22.5x10.5x6.5 

K18b Clinton, Ind. 

Soft. 

16.1 

26.0 

33.6 

41.6 

24.5x11x9 

Kl3c Clinton, Ind. 

Alley. 

14.5 

22.7 

29.0 

34.1 

23.5x10.5x8.8 

K13H Clinton, Ind. 

No. 1 paver. 

12.9 

19.6 

26.2 

31.5 

23.5x10.5x8.5 

Kl3e Clinton, Tnd. 

Overburned. 

14.4 

21 6 

27.5 

31.6 

23.5x10.5x8.5 

G-l Ta CofFpyville Kan. 

Brick. 



13.7 

21x10x5.5 

G-lIb Coffeyville, Kan 


5.6 

8.5 

10.9 

12.8 


G-IIc Coffeyville, Kan 

No. 1 block.. 

15.0 

21x10x8 

K-Th Danville Brick Co. 

Soft. 

19.3 

29.3 

38.9 

46.7 

22.5x11x8.5 

F-Ic Danville Brick Co. 

Alley. 

12.7 

19.8 

25.1 

30.2 

22x10x8 

F-Id Danville Brick Co . 

No. 1 paver. 

9.1 

13.9 

17.6 

20.8 

21x10x8 

Fie Danville Brick Co. 

Overburned. 

9.8 

17.2 

23.3 

28.4 

22x10x8.5 

K5h Fdwardsville, Ill. 

Soft. 

17.8 

28.7 

37.0 

44.9 

21.8x11.3x7.3 

K5c Kdwardsville, Ill . 

Alley. 

12.6 

19.5 

24.3 

28.7 

21.2x10.4x7.0 


No 1 paver 

7.8 

12.5 

16.3 

19.4 


KFie F.Hwardsville. Ill . 

(Jverburned. 

8.2 

12.2 

15.2 

18.1 

20.6x10.4x7.0 

S2b Kansas City, Mo., Diamond... 

No. 1 paver. 

14.8 

20.9 

24.9 

27.9 

20.5x9.5x6.5 

do 

10 4 

15.2 

18.8 

22.9 


L-lTc T.awrence, Kan . 

No. 2 paver. 

8.7 

11.0 

16.0 

18.6 

20x9.5x6.5 

K9b Poston B, Crawfordsville. Ind. 
K9c Poston B. Crawfordsville, Ind. 
K9d Poston B, Crawfordsville, Ind. 
K9e Poston B, Crawfordsville, Ind. 
T-TT Pittsburg, Kan . 

Soft. 

14.3 

23.6 

31.9 

39.5 

23x10x9 

Alley. 

8.9 

14.3 

18.0 

21.7 

23x10x9 

No. 1 paver . 

6.4 

9.7 

12.4 

14.8 

22.5x10x9 

()verburned. 

No. 1 paver. 

6.1 

8.4 

9.3 

12.3 

11.8 

15.1 

13.7 

17.1 

22.5x9.5x9 

20.5x9.75x6.5 

K6b Purington block, Galesburg, 111 
K6c Purington block, Galesburg, Ill 
K6d Purington block, Galesburg, Ill 
K6e Purington block, Galesburg,111 
K6b2Purington block, Galesburg,Ill 
K6c2 Purington block, Galesburg, Ill 

Soft. 

7.8 

13.4 

18.2 

22.8 

21.5x10.2x8.9 

Alley. 

7.5 

11.7 

15.4 

18.3 

21.5x10 2x8.9 

No. 1 paver. 

5.8 

9.1 

11.6 

13.3 

20.9x10.2x8.9 

Overburned. 

8.4 

14.7 

12.9 

23.7 

16.5 

31.7 

20.3 

38.6 

20.9x10.2x8.9 

21.5x10.2x8.9 


9.9 

16.6 

21.9 

26.6 

21.5x10.2x9.5 

No 1 paver 




19.8 


K4b Springfield. Til .... . 

Soft. 

19.7 

30.6 

38.2 

45.2 

22x10.5x7 

K4c Soringfield, Til 

Aliev. 

9.2 

14.5 

17.0 

19.9 

21x9.5x6.7 

K4d Springfield, Til. . 

No. I paver. 

9.9 

14.2 

16.9 

19.1 

21x10x6.5 

K4e Snrin^tTeld ill 

Over-burned. 

14.8 

18.9 



21x10x6.5 


No. 1 paver. 




17.5 

21x10x7 



7.9 

12.2 

14.2 

15.9 



Soft.. 

14.7 

20.1 

25 2 

29 0 

20.9x10.2x5.7 


Alley. 

10.7 

16.8 

21.6 

24.3 

20.3x10.2x5.7 


No. 1 paver. 

10.6 

15.5 

18.4 

21.9 

20.3x10.2x5 7 


Soft. . 

23.1 

32.8 

40.8 

46.5 

22x10x8.5 

KlOc Terre Haute, Tnd . m . 

Alley. 

19.9 

28.2 

32.9 

35.7 

21.5x10x8 



































































































































76 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


TABLE I— Concluded. 


Mark, Name of Brick. 


Grade 
of Brick. 


Average Total $ 
Loss of Two 
Charges at End of 


450 

Rev. 


900 

Rev. 


1350 

Rev, 


1800 

Rev. 


Size of Brick 
in cm. 


KlOd Terre Haute, Ind. 

KlOe Terre Haute, Ind. 

H-IJa Topeka, Kan. 

No. 1 paver. 

()ver-burned. 

22.6 

19.0 

29.8 

26.7 

35.3 

32.0 

39.4 

36.1 
33.0 
29.6 

53.5 

28.1 

20.2 

20.8 

21.2 

21.5x10x8 
22x10x8 5 
21x9.5x6.5 

H-Ilb Topeka, Kan. 


14.1 

26.5 

11.3 

10.2 

12.5 
8.4 

20.5 

32.7 

17.6 

15.0 

18.7 
13.4 

26.0 

45.6 

24.2 

18.5 

17.3 

K8b Wabash Clay Co., Veedersburg 
Indiana. 

Soft .. 

23.5x10x9 

23.5x10x9 

22.5x9.75x8.5 

23x10x9 

23x10x8.5 

K8c Wabash Clay Co., Veedersburg, 
Indiana. 

Alley.. 

K8d Wabash Clay Co., Veedersburg 

Indiana. 

K8e Wabash Clay Co., Veedersburg 

Indiana. 

K14b Western Brick Co.,Danville,Ill 
K14a Western Brick Co.,Danville,Ill 

R3a Imperial, Canton, O. 

No. 1 paver. 

Over-burned_ 

No. 1 paver. 

. .do. 

No. 1 paver. 


600 

Rev. 

12C0 

Rev. 

1800 

Rev. 

14.2 

14.8 

26.3 

16.9 
18.2 
17.8 
18.6 

15.3 
16.7 

22x10x9 

R3b Imperial, Canton, O. 

. .do. 


8.7 

13.9 

12.2 

20.9 

• 

Sib Moberly, Mo. 



20x9x8.5 
23.3x10x8 2 

Rla Nelsonville, O. 

No. 1 paver. 


Rib Nelsonville, O.. 

. .do. 


9.0 

13.9 

R2a Portsmouth, O. 

. .do. 


22.75x9.9x8 

R2b Portsmouth, O. 

. .do. 


9.8 

14.8 

R4a Royal, Canton, O. 

.do. 


21.8x10x9 

R4b Royal, Canton, O. 

. .do. 


10.3 

10.7 




































































TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


77 


TABLE II. 


Proportional Rattler Loss. 



450 Rev. 

900 Rev. 

1350 Rev. 

1800 Rev. 

K3b. 

40.1 

63.9 

63.0 

100.00 


46.0 

70.9 

86.3 

100.00 

K3d.. 

51.0 

76.4 

90.4 

100.00 

K3e. 

41.9 

70.3 

87.5 

100.CO 

Klb. 

37.7 

62.0 

82.4 

100.00 

Klc. 

39.2 

63.3 

83.2 

100 CO 

Kid. 

53.3 

72.7 

89.0 

100.00 

Kle. 

34.9 

59.8 

80.7 

100.00 

Bllb. 

48.8 

69.7 

85.5 

100.00 

Kl5b. 

49.2 

70.9 

8 b3 

100.00 

Kl5c. 

47.0 

71.8 

87.2 

100.00 

Kl5d. 

56.1 

75.5 

90.7 

100.00 

Kl5e. 

41.2 

66.0 

84.9 

100.00 

Kllb. 

43.1 

67.2 

84.6 

100.00 

Kllc. 

45.7 

67.5 

84.8 

100.CO 

KUd. 

48.0 

71.4 

87.0 

100.00 

Kile. 

39.5 

64.2 

84.0 

100.00 

11 lb. 

37.1 

67.4 

85.6 

100.00 

Kl3b. 

38.8 

62.2 

80.6 

100.00 

K13c. 

41.7 

65.3 

83.4 

100.00 

Kl3d... 

40.8 

62.1 

83.2 

100.00 

K13e. 

45.6 

68.4 

87.3 

100.00 

Glib. 

44.0 

66.6 

85.3 

100.00 

Fib. 

41.4 

62.8 

83.3 

100.00 

h lc.. 

42.1 

65.7 

83.2 

100.00 

Fid. 

43.8 

66.6 

84.6 

100 00 

Fie. 

34.4 

60.7 

82.2 

100.00 


52.9 

74.7 

89.1 

100.00 

LI lb. 

45.4 

66.5 

82.0 

100.00 

Lllc. 

46.9 

58.9 

85.9 

100.00 

K9b. 

36.0 

59.7 

80.8 

100.00 

K9c . 

42.0 

67.4 

85.0 

100.00 

K9d. 

43.3 

65.4 

83.4 

100.00 

K9e. 

44.3 

67.7 

85.5 

100.00 

Jllb . 

49.2 

71.5 

88.1 

100.00 

K4a . 





K4b. 

43.7 

67.8 

84.6 

100.00 

K4c . 

46.2 

72.6 

85.3 

100.00 

K4d. 

51.8 

74.2 

88.3 

100 00 

K4e. 





K2a. ' . 





K2b. 

50.0 

76.8 

89.8 

100.00 

KlOb. 

49.6 

70.4 

87.7 

100.00 

KlOc . 

55.6 

78.9 

92.1 

100.00 

KlOd. 

57.3 

75.7 

89.6 

100.00 

KlOe. 

52.7 

74.1 

88.9 

100.00 

Hllb. 

47.7 

69.3 

87.8 

100.CO 

K8b. 

49.5 

61.1 

85.2 

100.00 

K8c . 

40.3 

62.7 

86.2 

100.00 

K8d. 

50.3 

74.1 

91.2 

100.00 

Kl4b. 

40.2 

64.2 

83.2 

100.00 



600 Rev. 

1200 Rev. 

1800 Rev. 

R3b . 


59.0 

82.6 

ioo,ro 

Sib. 


53.1 

79.4 

100.00 

Rib . 


49.5 

76.6 

100.00 

R2b . 


52.4 

79.4 

100.CO 

R4b . 


61.6 

82.2 

100.00 


















































































78 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


TABLE III. 


Showing Percentage of the Total Loss in Each Stage of Rattler Loss. 



0-450 

Rev. 

450-900 

Rev. 

900-1350 

Rev. 

1350-1800 

Rev. 

K3b. 

40.2 

23.8 

19.1 

17.0 

K3c. 

46.1 

24.8 

15.4 

13.7 

K3d. 

51.0 

25.4 

14.9 

9.7 

K3e. 

41.9 

28.4 

17.2 

12.5 

Klb. 

37.7 

24.3 

20.4 

17.6 

Klc. 

39.2 

24.1 

19.9 

16.8 

Kid. 

53.3 

19.4 

16.3 

11.0 

Bllb. 

48.8 

20.9 

15.8 

14.5 

K15b. 

49.2 

21.7 

15.4 

18.7 

K15c. 

47.0 

23.8 

16.5 

12.8 

K15d. 

56.1 

19.5 

15.1 

9.3 

K15e. 

41.2 

24.8 

18.8 

15.1 

Kllb. 

43.1 

24.1 

17.4 

15.4 

Kllc. 

45.7 

21.8 

17.3 

15.2 

Klld. 

47.9 

23.4 

15.7 

12.9 

Kile. 

39.5 

24.7 

19.8 

16.0 

Illb. 

38.0 

29.4 

18.3 

14.4 

K13b. 

38.8 

23.5 

18.4 

19.4 

K13c. 

41.7 

23.6 

18.1 

16.6 

K13d. 

40.8 

21.3 

21.1 

16.8 

Kl3e. 

45 6 

23.8 

18.9 

12.7 

Glib. 

44.0 

22.6 

18.7 

14.7 

Fib. 

41.4 

21.4 

20.5 

16.7 

Flc. 

42.1 

23.6 

17.5 

16.8 

Fid. 

43.8 

22.8 

18.0 

15.4 

Fie. 

34.4 

26.3 

21.6 

17.7 

S2b. 

52.9 

21.8 

14.4 

10.9 

Lllb. 

45.4 

21.1 

15.5 

18.0 

Lllc. 

46.9 

12.1 

27.0 

14.1 

K9b. 

36.0 

23.7 

21.1 

19.2 

K9c. 

42.0 

25.4 

17.6 

15.0 

K9d. 

43.3 

22.2 

18.0 

16.6 

K9e. 

44.3 

23.4 

17.8 

14.5 

Jllb. 

49.2 

22.3 

16.7 

11.9 

K4b. 

43.6 

24.2 

16.8 

15.4 

K4c. 

46.2 

26.3 

12.7 

14.8 

K4d. 

51.4 

22.4 

14.0 

11.7 

K2b. 

50.0 

26.8 

13.0 

10.2 

KlOb. 

49.6 

20.8 

17.3 

12.3 

KlOc.. 

55.7 

23.3 

13.2 

7.9 

KlOd. 

57.3 

18.4 

13.9 

10.4 

KlOe.. 

52.8 

21.5 

14 7 

11.1 

Hllb. 

47.7 

21.5 

18.5 

12.2 

K8d. 

49.5 

11.6 

24 2 

14.8 

K8c. 

40.3 

22.4 

22.5 

13.8 

K8b. 

50.3 

23.8 

17.2 

3.8 

K14b. 

40.2 

24 1 

19.0 

16.8 

R3b. 


0-600 

Rev. 

59 1 

600-1200 

Rev. 

23 5 

1200-1800 

Rev. 

17.4 

20 6 

Sib. 


54 1 

26 3 

Rib. 


49.5 

27 1 

23.4 

20.6 

17.8 

R2b.. 


52 4 

27 0 

R4b. 


61.6 

20.7 














































































TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


79 


TABLE IV* 

Abstract of Report of Tests of Paving Brick. 


Name of Brick. 

Lab. No. 

Per Cent 
Abs. 
Water. 

Modu¬ 
lus of 
Rupture. 

Ciush- 

ing 

Strength 

“Albion,” Albion, 111. 

K3b 

10.0 

995 



K3c 

3.5 

2100 

4500 


K3d 

1.05 

2350 

48C0 


K3e 

0.7 

2700 

3200 

“Alton,” Alton, Ill. 

Klb 

11.2 




Klc 

6.1 

1630 

4000 


Kid 

0.9 

2535 

8400 


Kle 

1.2 

1420 


Atchison, Kans. 

B2 


1800 


“Barr Clay Co.,” Streator, Ill. 

K15b 

7.67 

1776 

7800 


K15c 

1.0 

2365 

11200 


K15d 

0.83 

2600 

11700 


K15e 

0.8 

2870 

8500 

“Caney Brick Co ,” Caney, Kans. 

12 

3.416 

1970 


• 

“Caney Vitrified Brick Co.,” Topeka, Kans. 

H2 

1.27 

2300 


“Clinton,” Clinton, Ind. 

K13b 

9.3 

1240 

2700 


K13c 

6.9 

1280 



K13d 

1.7 

1620 

6000 


K13e 

1.1 

1500 

5600 

“The Coffeyville Brick and Tile Co”. 





“Coffeyville Brick”. 

G2 

0.8 

2320 

6500 

“Coffeyville Block”. 

G2 

0.83 

1900 


“Danville,” Danville, Ill. 

Fib 

13.2 




Flc 

4.8 

1700 

5200 


Fid 

2.8 

980 

3400 


Fie 

1.7 

1670 

6100 

“Diamond, ” Kansas City f Mo.*.. 

S2b 

0.72 

2410 


“ FIydrnlir, ” St. Louis Mo . 

K2a 





K2b 

0.6 

2430 

8300 

“Indiana Block,” Brazil, Ind. 

Kllb 

13.1 

685 



Kllc 

2.9 

1510 



Klld 

1.89 

2260 



Kile 

2.7 

870 


r.awrenre, Kans. . 

L2b 

8.6 

1770 



L2c 

0.94 

1960 

10000 

41 TVTpfmnnlitan Rloclr ” Canton. Ohio. 

R4a 





R4b 

1.05 

3130 

7600 


R3a 





R3b 

1.27 

2800 

7200 

“Missouri ” Moberly, Mo. 

Sib 

3.313 

2130 



Rla 





Rib 

1.68 

1790 

38C0 


R2a 





R2b 

2.211 

2505 


Pittshnrp' Kans . 

J2 

2.313 

2220 


“Poston Block,” Crawfordsville, Ind. 

K9b 

10.2 

705 

3900 


K9c 

6.3 

10S0 

8400 


K9d 

2.513 

2050 

9800 


K9e 

0 8 

2050 

10300 


























































80 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


TABLE IV —Concluded 

Abstract of Report of Tests of Paving Brick. 


» 

Name of Brick. 

Lab. No. 

Per Cent 
Abs. 
Water. 

Modu¬ 
lus of 
Rupture 

Crushi’g 

Strength 

Springfield, Ill. 

K4a 





K4b 

12.2 

980 

2100 


K4c 

5.0 

2360 

5200 


K4d 

1.16 

2250 



K4e 

0.6 

1890 

3600 

“Terre Haute Block,” Terre Haute, Ind. 

KlOb 

9.1 

1375 



KlOc 

2.0 

1910 



KlOd 

1.05 

2340 

6000 


KlOe 

0.8 

1880 

2400 

“Wabash Clay Co.,” Culver Block, Veedersburg, Ind 

K8b 

9.9 

585 

2700 


K8c 

3.9 

1035 

4400 


K8d 

3.9 

1440 

7600 


K8e 

1.6 

810 

4400 

“Western Paver,” Danville, Ill. 

K14a 





K14b 

4.218 

1617 

5200 





















CDOO^OSCnrf^COtO 


TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


81 


TABLE V. 

K 3 b—ALBION, ILL. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1. 

3.25 

4.25 

6 

6020 

925 

995 

— 70 

7 0 


3.30 

4.25 

6 

6560 

990 


— 5 

0 5 

3. 

3.28 

4.28 

6 

5500 

820 


—175 

17 6 

4. 

3.22 

4.15 

6 

6260 

1020 


+ 25 

2 5 

5. 

3.28 

4.40 

6 

6770 

1050 


4- 55 

5 5 

K . 

3.25 

4.25 

6 

6030 

925 


— 70 

7 0 

7. 

3.20 

4.15 

6 

7180 

1170 


+175 

17.6 

8 . 

3.22 

4.08 

6 

8160 

1370 


+375 

37.7 

9. 

3.30 

4.25 

6 

4550 

690 


-305 

30.6 





57030 

8960 



126.0 




Av. 

6337 

995 



14.0 


Absorption. 


b+ 

2 

3 

bol 

“2 


Number. 


Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

2.385 

2.615 

.23 

9.7 

2.72 

2:965 

.245 

9.0 

2.65 

2.885 

.235 

8.9 

2.04 

2.285 

.245 

12.0 

2.23 

2.46 

.23 

10.3 




49.9 



Average .... 

10.0 


K 3 c— ALBION, ILL. 
Transverse. 







Modulus 





No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load— 
pounds. 

of 

Rupture, 

pounds 

persq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

[Remarks 


3.15 

3.85 

6 

10650 

2050 

2100 

—50 

2.4 

3.30 

3.80 

6 

12830 

2420 


4-320 

15.2 

3.20 

4.00 

6 

4700 

830 


—1270 

60.5 

3.40 

3.55 

6 

12470 

2610 


+510 

24.3 

3.20 

4.00 

6 

8360 

1470 


—630 

30.0 

3.15 

3.85 

6 

14710 

2810 


+740 

35 3 

3.18 

3.80 

6 

8950 

1760 


—340 

16 4 

3.15 

3.80 

6 

14100 

2800 


+700 

33.3 

3.30 

3.78 

6 

11330 

2160 


+60 

2.9 




98100 

18940 



220.3 



Average 

10900 

2100 



24.5 


Fracture 
glassy on 
one side. 


















































































































82 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table No. 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet, 

Gain. 

cD. 

3.165 

3.23 

.065 

2.1 

2. 

3.02 

3.145 

.125 

4.1 

3. 

2.9 

3.055 

.155 

5.3 

C 2 1. 

3.26 

3.34 

.08 

2.5 

2. 

2.775 

2.875 

.10 

3.6 





17.6 




Av. 

3.5 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress 

lb. per sq. in. 

2. 

3% x 3V4 

10.9 

39400 

3600 

4. 

3?8 X 3% 

11.3 

42000 

3700 

5. 

3% x 3 

10.1 

63700 

6300 

8. 

S% x 2V2 

8.4 

37200 

4430 

9. 

3% x 3V a 

10.5 

51200 

4870 

9. 

3%*m 

16.0 

66600 

4160 





27060 





Av.4510 


K 3 d—ALBION, ILL. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1. 

3.20 

3.72 

6 

12380 

2520 

2350 

+170 

7.2 

2. 

3.20 

3.78 

6 

14450 

2840 


+490 

20 8 

3. 

3.20 

3.75 

6 

9300 

1860 


—490 

20 8 

4. 

3.15 

3.80 

6 

9880 

1960 


—390 

16.6 

5 .... 

3.10 

3.75 

6 

12350 

2550 


+200 

8.5 





58360 

11730 



73.9 




Av .... 

11672 

2350 



14.8 
























































































'1 CO ^ »o 


TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


83 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 


Dry. 


1 

•> 


Kilos. 


Wet. 


Gain. 


Per cent. 


2.88 

2.93 

.05 

1.7 

2.96 

2.975 

.015 

0.5 

2.96 

2.975 

.015 

0.5 

3.045 

3.08 

.035 

1.2 

2.98 

3.02 

.04 

1.3 




5.2 



Average .... 

1.0 


Crushing. 


■ 

Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lbs. per sq. in. 


3^x334 


11.4 

61000 

5350 

3. 

3M X 3J4 


10.6 

68000 

6420 

4. 

3H x 3% 


11.8 

58200 

4930 


3^ x 3V 2 


11.4 

34400 

3000 

5. 

m x 3 % 


11.0 

35100 

3200 


3H x 4 


13.0 

78300 

6020 






28920 





Average. 

4820 


K 3 e—ALBION, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1. 

3.20 

3.80 

6 

10000 

2070 

2700 

—630 

23.3 

9, 

3.18 

3.72 

6 

13960 

2860 


+160 

5.9 

3... . 

3.18 

3.76 

6 

14860 

2970 


+270 

10.0 

4 

3.20 

3.80 

6 

15650 

3060 


+360 

13.3 


3 20 

3 70 

6 

12360 

2540 


—160 

5.9 

6. 

3.18 

3.82 

6 

13930 

2700 


0 

0 





81360 

16200 



58.4 




Av .... 

13560 

2700 


- 

9.7 



















































































05 05 rf*. INS >-* 


84 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

- 

Kilos. 


Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 


2.84 

2.875 

.035 

1.2 

2. 

2.785 

2.81 

.025 

0.9 

3. 

2.915 

2.93 

.015 

0.5 

4. 

2.84 

2.86 

.02 

. 0.7 


2.92 

2.925 

.005 

0.2 





3.5 


Crushing. 


Number. 


Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress— 
lbs. per sq. in. 

3^x3 

9.7 

29700 

2960 

334 x 3J4 

10.6 

45400 

4280 

334 x 2% 

9.3 

26700 

2880 

334 x 3% 

12.2 

41400 

3380 

334 x 434 

13.4 

35800 

2670 




16170 



Average. 

3234 


Kjb—ALTON, ILL. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bxi. 

1.28 

1.435 

.155 

12.1 

U ... . . . .... ..... .... 

1.08 

1.215 

.135 

12.5 

3. 

1.07 

1.205 

.135 

12.6 

b 2 l. 

1.79 

1.98 

.19 

10.6 

2. 

1.875 

2.025 

.15 

8.0 





55.8 




Average .... 

11.2 

































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


85 


Table 5 —Continued. 


KiC—ALTON, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sqr. in. 

0 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1. 

2.85 

3.90 

6 

8030 

1660 

1630 

+ 30 

1.8 

2. 

2.70 

3.78 

6 

8390 

1960 


+330 

20 2 

3. 

2.82 

3.85 

6 

5770 

1240 


—390 

23.9 

4. 

2.85 

3.60 

6 

8120 

1980 


+350 

21.5 

5. 

2.88 

3.75 

6 

6480 

1440 


—190 

11.7 

6. 

2.74 

3.68 

6 

6200 

1500 


—130 

8.0 





42990 

9780 



97.1 




Average 

7165 

1630 



16.2 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

• 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cil. 

2.53 

2.63 

.10 

4.0 

2. 

2.08 

2.23 

.15 

7.2 

Col. 

1.945 

2 085 

.14 

7.2 

2. 

1.945 

2.085 

.14 

7.2 

2 

2.44 

2.555 

.115 

4.7 





30.3 




Average .... 

6.1 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq.in. 

1. 

2% x 4 

11.0 

47800 

4350 

l. 

2 % x 

11.7 

41000 

3500 

3. 

2% x 4V4 

11.7 

52000 

4440 

5. 

2% x 4V4 

11.7 

33000 

2820 


2^x4 

11.0 

55800 

5070 





20180 




Average. 

4036 























































































86 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Kjd—ALTON, ILL 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1. 

2.75 

3.68 

6 

8580 

2080 

2535 

—455 

18.0 

2. 

2 78 

3 70 

6 

11420 

2700 


+165 

6.5 

3. 

2 70 

3 85 

6 

11100 

2500 


—32 

1.4 

4. 

2 78 

3 70 

6 

13020 

3100 


+565 

22.3 

5. 

2.70 

3.85 

6 

9860 

2220 


—315 

12.4 

6. 

2.70 

3*80 

6 

11330 

2610 


+75 

3.0 





65310 

15210 



63.6 




Average 

10885 

2535 



10.6 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

« 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

d+. 

2.795 

2.82 

.025 

0.9 

2 . 

2.815 

2.83 

.015 

0.5 

3. 

2.64 

2.675 

.025 

1.0 

d 2 l. 

2.925 

2.955 

.03 

1.0 

2 . 

2.655 

2.68 

.025 

0.9 

. 




4.3 




Average .... 

0.9 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq.in. 

1. 

3^x3 

11.2 

87700 

7850 

2. 

3 3 4 x m 

10 3 

112000 

10800 


m x 2M 

10.0 

99000 

9600 

6. 

3% x 2 % 

10.3 

58000 

5600 

6. 

3^x3 

11.2 

92300 

8250 





42100 




Average. 

8420 





















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


87 


Table 5 —Continued. 

K^e—ALTON, ILL. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth — 
inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 
pounds 
per.sq. in 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

Remarks. 

1. 

2 

2.90 

2.90 

3.02 

3.00 

3.25 

4.48 

4.20 

4.15 

3.90 

3.80 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

Average 

7800 

9940 

9650 

6290 

6380 

1200 

1750 

1680 

1240 

1220 

1420 

-220 

+350 

+260 

—130 

—200 

15.5 

24.6 
18.3 

12.7 

14.1 

Very 

irregular 

and 

badly out 
of 

shape. 

3 


4 .... 

5 





40060 

7090 

85.2 

8012 

1420 

17.0 




Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

e+.. . 

2.49 

2.515 

.025 

1.0 

2 . 

2.495 

2.525 

.03 

1.2 

3 . 

2.435 

2.455 

.02 

0.8 

^ 2 i . 

2.27 

2.3 

.03 

1.3 

2. 

2.38 

2.415 

.085 

1.5 





5.8 




Average .... 

1.2; 


B 2 b—ATCHISON, KAN. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Average 

Variation 

from 

average 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.46 

2.46 

2.46 

2.46 

2.52 

2.46 

2.46 

2.50 

2.52 

2.46 

2.46 

2.52 

3.90 

3.93 
3.90 
3.90 
3.90 
3.82 
3.84 

3.94 
3.90 
3.84 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

a 

8140 

6950 

6750 

7920 • 

9000 

6650 

6110 

5940 

7920 

8950 

6300 

8670 

1960 

1660 

1800 

+160 

—140 

8.9 
7 8 


1630 


—170 

9.5 

3 .... 

1910 


+110 

+320 

6.1 

4 .... 

2120 


17.8 

5 .... 

1670 


—130 

7.2 

b .... 

6 

1520 


—280 

15 6 

1 .... 
8 .... 
9 .... 
10 .... 

6 

1380 


—420 

23.4 

a 

1860 


+ 60 
+420 

3.3 

6 

6 

6 

2220 


23.4 

1560 


—240 

13.3 

11 .... 

12 .... 

3.84 

2100 


+300 

16.7 







89300 

21590 



153.0 




Av .... 

7440 

1800 



12.7 



























































































































88 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


Tbull. no. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Fib—ATCHISON, KAN. 
Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

B*1. 

1.926 

1.882 

2.175 

.249 

12.9 

9 

2.155 

.273 

14.5 

3.:. 

2.105 

2.385 

.28 

13.3 

B ,1 . 

2.032 

2.325 

.293 

14.2 

"2 . 

2.42 

2.695 

.275 

11.3 








66.2 





Average .... 

13.2 


K 16 b—BARR CLAY CO., STREATOR, ILL. 


Transverse Test. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.36 

4.02 

6 

10400 

1724 

1776 

— 54 

3.4 

2 .... 

3.36 

3.96 

6 

10950 

1870 


+ 94 

5.3 

3.... 

3.36 

4.06 

6 

11580 

1881 


+105 

5.9 

4.... 

3.36 

4.02 

6 

11800 

1956 


+180 

10.1 

5.... 

3.34 

4.06 

6 

11250 

1847 


+ H 

4.0 

6 .... 

3,34 

4.08 

6 

10350 

1675 


—101 

5.7 

7.... 

3.38 

3.98 

6 

11360 

1911 


+135 

7.6 

8 .... 

3.38 

4.08 

6 

9790 

1558 


—218 

12.3 

9.... 

3.34 

3.91 

6 

11100 

1959 


+183 

10.3 

10 .... 

3.42 

4.14 

6 

8980 

1379 


—397 

22.4 





107560 

17760 



87.0 




Average 

10756.0 

1776.0 



8.70 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Bil. 

2.965 

3.155 

.19 

6.4 

9 

2.915 

3.145 

.23 

7.9 

3. 

2.88 

3.105 

.225 

7.8 

b 2 i. 

2.808 

3.035 

.227 

8.1 

2. 

3.025 

3.275 

.25 

8.3 





38.5 




Average. 

7.7 






















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


89 


Table 5 — Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 

lbs. per sq. inch. 


3% x 2J4 

8.4 

60C00 

7150 

4. 

3?4x3 

10.0 

68600 

6860 


3 3 8 x 2J4 

8.4 

84000 

10000 


3% x 2 % 

8.4 

66000 

7850 

8. 

3% x 2 % 

9 3 

67500 

7250 





39110 





Average.7822 


K 15 d—BARR CLAY CO., STREATOR, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.36 

3.84 

6 

12990 

2360 

2365 

— 5 

0.2 

2 .... 

3.36 

3.84 

6 

12780 

2320 


— 45 

1.9 

3_ 

3.36 

3.74 

6 

12330 

2360 


— 5 

0.2 

4 .... 

3.26 

3 84 

6 

9800 

1840 


—525 

22.2 

5_ 

3.26 

3.82 

6 

11920 

22C0 


—165 

7.0 

6 .... 

3 30 

3.94 

6 

14240 

2500 


+135 

5.7 

'7 .... 

3.30 

3.84 

6 

13700 

2530 


+165 

7.0 

8 .... 

3.34 

3.78 

6 

13640 

2580 


+215 

9.1 

9_ 

3.30 

3.84 

6 

13780 

2540 


+175 

7.4 

10 .... 

3.34 

.3 84 

6 

13270 

2420 


+ 55 

2.3 





128450 

23650 



63.0 




Av .... 

12845 

2365 



6.3 


K 15 c—Absorption. 




Kilos. 

Per cent. 


Number. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

C X 1. 

3.175 

3.20 

.025 

.8 

2 

3.29 

3.318 

.028 

.9 

3 . 

3.47 

3.51 

.04 

1.2 

Col. 

3.282 

3.318 

.036 

1.1 

2. 

3.315 

3.348 

.033 

1.0 






5.0 





Average .... 

1.0 














































































CO co to 00 00 


90 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Crushing. 



Size— 

Area— 

Load— 

Stress— 

Number. 

inches. 

square inches. 

pounds. 

lb. per sq. in. 


3?8 x 2 

6.7 2 

56000 

3% x 2 % 

9.3 

105200 

3 % x 134 

5.5 

97100 

3 % x 134 

4.2 

37800 

3% x 134 

4.2 

40600 


8360 

11300 

17700 

9000 

9700 


56060 


Av. 11212 


K 15 c-BARR CLAY CO., STREATOR, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 

pounds 

persq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.34 

3.84 

6 

14610 

2670., 

2600 

+ 70 

2.7 

2 .... 

3.30 

3.84 

6 

14620 

2720 


+120 

4.6 

3 . .. 

3.30 

3.78 

6 

11870 

2260 


—340 

13.1 

4 .... 

3.24 

3.96 

6 

14880 

2640 


+ 40 

1.5 

5 .... 

3.26 

3.84 

6 

14730 

2760 


+160 

6.2 

6 .... 

3.26 

3.90 

6 

15600 

2840 


+240 

9.2 

7 .... 

3.24 

3.90 

6 

12000 

2200 


—400 

15.4 

8 .... 

3.26 

3.86 

6 

15040 

2810 


+210 

8.1 

9 .... 

3.30 

3 84 

6 

14270 

2650 


+ 50 

1.9 

10 .... 

3.30 

3.90 

6 

13690 

2490 


—110 

4.2 





141310 

26040 



66.9 




Av .... 

14130 

2600 



6.7 


' K 16 d—A bsorption. 


- 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Number. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

D X 1. 

3.115 

3.14 

.025 

0.8 

2. 

3.005 

3.038 

.033 

1.1 

3. 

3.09 

3.105 

.015 

0.5 

Dol. 

3.165 

3.195 

.03 

0.9 

2. 

3.255 

3.282 

.027 

0.8 






4.1 




Average .... 

0.8 












































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


91 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 

iSize— 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

3. 

3 3 4 x 2% 

8.0 

90500 

11300 

6. 

Ws x 2J4 

8.4 

100300 

11900 

7. 

3 3 / 8 x2^ 

8.4 

109100 

13000 

9. 

3% x 2% 

8.8 

118200 

13500 

10. 

3% X 3 “ 

10.2 

90800 

8900 





58600 





Av. 11720 


K 15 e—BARR CLAY CO., STREATOR, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- - 
inches. 

1 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.36 

3.22 

3.48 

3.36 

3.36 

o qq 

3.90 

4.14 

3.98 

3.84 

3.84 

3.90 

3.90 

3.78 

** Q.A 

6 

6 

17330 

18360 

15110 

14040 

15710 

16020 

19360 

15760 

13580 

18470 

3050 

3000 

2870 

+180 

+130 

6.3 

4.5 

L . . . . 

6 

0 

2520 


—350 

12.2 

6 .... 

2560 


—310 

10.8 

4 .... 

0 

2860 


— 10 

0.3 

5 .... 

6 .... 

0 

2630 


—240 

8.4 

6 . flo 

3 30 
3.42 
3.26 
3.36 

0 

3460 


+590 

20.6 

1 .... 

8 .... 

6 

0 

2960 


+ 90 

3.1 

2540 


—330 

11.5 

9 .... 
10 .... 

o Qfi 

6 

3160 


+290 

10.1 

o. y o 







163740 

28740 



87.8 




Av. 

16370 

2870 



8.8 







1 


-- 


Absorption. 


Number. 


Dry. 


eil 

2 

3 

e 2 l 

2 


Kilos. 


Wet. 


Gain. 


Per ceDt. 


2.94 

3.17 

2.965 

3.195 

.025 

.025 

3.245 

3.275 

.030 

2.96 

2.98 

'.02 

3.01 

3.04 

.03 


- 

Average .... 


0 . 


4.2 


0.8 


00 GO 05 t— O 































































































CO lO CD GO Oi 


92 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 


Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

3^x2% 

8.0 

55000 

6880 

%% X 2;^ 

8.4 

56900 

6780 

3%x2M 

7.6 

78000 

10300 

3% x 2M 

9.3 

92300 

9930 

3%x2 

6.7 

57200 

8550 




42440 



Average. 

8488 


I 3 b—CANEY', KAN. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.34 

4.26 

6 

8900 

1890 

1970 

— 80 

4.1 

2 .... 

2.28 

4.22 

6 

4940 

1090 


— 880 

44 6 

3 .... 

2.16 

4.21 

6 

11920 

2830 


+ 860 

43.6 

4 .... 

2.28 

4.21 

6 

7040 

1570 


— 400 

20.3 

5 .... 

2.22 

4.08 

6 

12250 

3000 


+1030 

52.2 

6 .... 

2.28 

4.21 

6 

8380 

I860 


— no 

5 6 

7 .... 

2.22 

4.14 

6 

9230 

2190 


+ 220 

11 2 

8 .... 

2.22 

4.14 

6 

9050 

2150 


+ 180 

9 1 

9 .... 

2.28 

4.08 

6 

6170 

1460 


— 510 

25 9 

0 .... 

2.26 

4.26 

6 

7350 

1620 


— 350 

17 8 

1 .... 

2.26 

4.08 

6 

8550 

2050 


4- 80 

4 1 

2 

2.21 

4.08 

6 

7700 

1880 


— 90 

4.6 





101480 

23590 



233.1 




Av. 

8460 

1970 



18.6 



' 







Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b,l . 

2.39 

2.498 

.108 

4 5 

2 . 

2.517 

2.63 

.113 

4 5 

3 . 

2.676 

2,748 

.072 

2 7 

b 2 l ....... 

2.42 

2.495 

.075 

3 1 

2 . 

2.45 

2.505 

.055 

2.2 





17.0 




Average .... 

3.4 






































































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


93 


Table 5 —Continued. 


R 3 b—CANTON METROPOLITAN (Imperial.) 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.48 

4.02 

6 

16130 

2580 

2800 

-220 

7.9 

2 .... 

3.48 

4.02 

6 

16740 

2680 


—120 

4.3 

3 .... 

3.60 

4.02 

6 

14680 

2270 


—530 

18.9 

4 .... 

3.54 

3.96 

6 

20690 

3350 


+550 

19.6 

5 .... 

3.60 

3.90 

6 

18110 

2980 


+180 

6.4 

6 .... 

3.48 

4.02 

6 

19770 

3170 


+370 

13.2 

7 .... 

3.48 

3.96 

6 

15730 

2590 


—210 

7.5 

8 .... 

3.48 

3.90 

6 

16680 

2830 


+ 30 

1.1 

9 .... 

3.48 

3.96 

6 

16970 

2800 


0 

0 

10 .... 

3.48 

4.02 

6 

19610 

3150 


+350 

12.5 

11 .... 

3.48 

3.96 

6 

16640 

2470 


— 60 

2.1 

12 .... 

3.48 

3.96 

6 

15100 

2490 


. —310 

11.1 





206850 

33630 



104.6 




Av . 

17238 

2800 



8.7 











Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet, 

Gain. 

b+ . 

3.295 

3.355 

.06 

1.8 

‘2 . 

3.975 

4.015 

.04 

1.0 

O 

4.075 

4.105 

.03 

0.7 

boi . 

3.995 

4.025 

.03 

0.8 

2 . 

3.775 

3.83 

.055 

1.5 





5.8 




Average .... 

1.2 


Crusing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq.in. 

9 

3 1 / 2 x4 

14. 

94550 

6750 

3 . 

334 x iV& 

14.4 

109700 

7620 

6 

334x4% 

15.3 

99250 

6500 

7 .... 

3J4 x4 M 

14.9 

141700 

9500 



15.3 

83500 

5460 





35830 




Average. 

7166 































































































94 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continned. 


R 4 b—CANTON, METROPOLITAN, (Block). 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.60 

3.96 

6 

19480 

3100 

3130 

— 30 

1.0 

2 .... 

3.54 

3.96 

6 

18980 

3080 


— 50 

1.6 

3 .... 

3.60 

3.96 

6 

15480 

2470 


—660 

21.1 

4 .... 

3.58 

3.96 

6 

18230 

2930. 


—200 

6.4 

5 ... 

3.58 

3.96 

6 

20400 

3280 


+150 

4.8 

6 .... 

3.58 

3.96 

6 

19830 

3180 


+ 50 

1.6 

7 .... 

3.60 

3.96 

6 

21220 

3380 


+250 

8.0 

8 .... 

3.54 

3.90 

6 

18690 

3130 


0 

0 

9 .... 

3.58 

3.96 

6 

20770 

3320 


+190 

6.1 

10 .... 

3.58 

3.96 

6 

17350 

2780 


—350 

11.2 

11 .... 

3.54 

3.90 

6 

22170 

3710 


4580 

18.5 

12 .... 

3.54 

3.90 

6 

18870 

3170 


+ 40 

1.3 





231470 

37530 



81.6 



f 

Average 

19290 

3130 



6.8 


Absorption. 




Kilos. 



Number. 




Per cent. 


Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 


b ± l . 

3.835 

3.885 

.05 

1.3 

2. 

3.705 

3.745 

.04 

1.1 

3. 

4.12 

4.155 

.035 

0.9 

b+ . 

3.755 

3.785 

.03 

0.8 

2 . 

3.74 

3.77 

.03 

0.8 





4.9 




Av. 

1.00 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size 

inches. 

Area 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. persq. in. 

10. 

3^x454 

15.7 

126700 

8070 

4. 

314X4 

14.0 

128000 

9150 

5. 

3J4x4^ 

14.4 

135800 

9140 

7. 

314x2% 

8.3 

58300 

7030 

8. 

3^x37s 

13.6 

61000 

4500 

38190 

Av.7638 























































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING RR1CK. 


95 


Table 5 —Continued. 


K 13 b—CLINTON, IND. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av. Sr. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent, 
var. 

1 .. 

3.35 

4.15 

6 

9000 

1400 

1240 

+160 

12.9 

2 .... 

3.48 

4.15 

6 

7410 

1110 


—130 

10.5 

3 ... 

3.48 

4.22 

6 

11190 

1630 


+390 

31.4 

4 .... 

3.50 

4.25 

6 

7090 

1010 


—230 

18.5 

5 .... 

3.38 

4.42 

6 

8670 

1180 


- 60 

4.8 

6 .... 

3.32 

4.10 

6 

7290 

1180 


— 60 

4.8 

7 .... 

3.40 

4.38 

6 

6850 

945 


—295 

23.8 

8 .... 

3.52 

4.30 

6 

8000 

1110 


—130 

10.5 

9 .... 

3.38 

4.32 

6 

9620 

1380 


+140 

11.3 

10 .... 

3.48 

4.20 

6 

10120 

1490 


+250 

20.2 





85240 

12430 



148.7 




Av. 

8520 

1240 



14.9 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

fcql . 

3.46 

3.678 

.218 

6.3 

2 . 

3.495 

3.745 

.250 

7.2 

3 . 

2.66 

2.698 

.338 

12.7 

b 2 l . 

3.59 

3.81 

.22 

6.1 

2 . 

2.35 

2.678 

.328 

14.0 





46.3 




Av. 

9.3 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size 

inches. 

Area 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress— # 
lb. per sq. in. 

l. 

3^x4% 

15.6 5 

40100 

2580 

6. 

3%x3 34 

11.8 

19100 

1640 

7. 

3%x4 

13.5 

19500 

1440 

9. 

3%x354 

12.2 

36700 

3000 

10. 

3%x4}4 

15.2 

75600 

5000 





13660 





Av.2732 



























































































CDOO—3CSC^*-COtN3h-i 


96 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


K 13 c-CLINTON, ind. 


Transverse. 


Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

rupture,— 
pounds 
persq. in. 

Av. Sr. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

3.48 

4.08 

6 

8310 

1290 

1280 

+10 

0 .< 

3.36 

4.21 

6 

10550 

1590 


+310 

24.! 

3.42 

4.02 

6 

6850 

1120 


—160 

12. 

3.28 

4.32 

6 

9960 

1470 


+190 

14. 

3.36 

4.10 

6 

7820 

1250 


—30 

2.; 

3.42 

4.08 

6 

7720 

1220 


—60 

4/ 

3.40 

4.02 

6 

7410 

1220 


—60 

4/ 

3.42 

4.16 

6 

9020 

1380 


+ 100 

7/ 

3.38 

4.10 

6 

6310 

1000 


—280 

21.< 




73950 

11544 



93/ 



Average 

8220 

1280 



9.4 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent 

Dry. 

i 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cil. 

3.308 

3.495 

.187 

5.7 

2... 

3.288 

3.512 

.224 

6.a 

3. 

3 215 

3.42 

.205 

6.4 

C 2 1. 

3.265 

3.48 

.215 

6.6 

9 

3.23 

3.525 

.295 

9.1 





34.6 




Av. 

6.9 


K 13 d—CLINTON, IND. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

rupture,— 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av. Sr. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1. 

3.20 

4.10 

6 

10240 

1710 

1620 

+90 

5.5 

2. 

3.40 

3.95 

6 

8580 

1460 


—160 

9.9 

3. 

3.20 

4.05 

6 

8640 

1490 


—130 

8.0 

4 . 

3.28 

4.00 

6 

11100 

1900 


+280 

17.3 

5.... 

3.30 

4.02 

6 

8930 

1510 


—no 

6.8 

6. 

3.20 

4.10 

6 

11620 

1940 


+320 

19.8 

7. 

3.25 

4.02 

6 

5380 

925 


—695 

42.8 

8. 

3.35 

3.98 

6 

12040 

2040 


+420 

25.9 

VJ 

3.38 

4.10 

6 

10040 

1590 


—30 

1.9 

10. 

3.15 

3.90 

6 

8580 

1610 


—10 

0.6 





95150 

16170 



136.5 




Average 

9515 

1620 



13.6 



































































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICKS. 


97 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

dil. 

3.51 

3.545 

.035 

1.0 

2.. 

3.575 

3.625 

.05 

1.4 

3. 

3.46 

3.545 

.085 

2.5 

d>i. 

3.035 

3.078 

.043 

1.4 

2. 

3.768 

2.835 

.067 

2.4 





8.7 




Av. 

1.7 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pound. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 


3%x4 

13.5 

54700 

4050 

6. 


8.4 

66000 

7860 

8. 

3 3 4x4 

13.5 

82300 

6100 

8. 

3?gx3% 

12.7 

540C0 

4250 

9. 

3%xl 

13.5 

105400 

7800 





30060 





Av.6012 


K 13 e—CLINTON, IND, 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
persq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.36 

4.20 

6 

6230 

950 

1500 

- 550 

36.7 

2 .... 

3.38 

4.14 

6 

3430 

530 


970 

64.6 

3 . 

3.36 

3.96 

6 

10650 

1820 


+ 320 

21.4 

4 

3.40 

4.26 

6 

22940 

3350 


+1850 

123.2 

5 

3.36 

4.20 

6 

9450 

1440 


— 60 

4.0 

6 

3.42 

4.50 

6 

12210 

1600 


+ 100 

6.7 


3.36 

4.08 

6 

4950 

795 


— 705 

47.1 

8 

3.36 

4.24 

6 

6660 

995 


— 505 

33.7 

9 ’ 

3.36 

4.08 

6 

13400 

2160 


+ 660 

44.1 

10 .... 

3.42 

4.02 

6 

8200 

1350 ' 


— 150 

10.0 





100120 

14990 



391.5 




Av .... 

10000 

1500 



39.2 


7 ( 


'I 

I 





















































































98 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

ejl. 

3.778 

3 812 

.034 

0.9 

9 

3 363 

3 40 

.037 

1.1 

3. 

3.58 

3.62 

.04 

1.1 

e 2 l. 

3 122 

3 15 

.028 

0.9 

2... 

2.91 

2.95 

.04 

1.4 









5.4 





Average .... 

1 1 




Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lbs. per sq. in. 

2. 

3J4x3 M 

11.4 

63700 

5600 

3. 

3V 2 x2% 

9.6 

45400 

4740 

5. 

3U; x 414 

14.9 

71000 

4760 

9. 

3^2 X 414 

14.9 

102900 

6900 

10. 

3J^x 4 

14. 

80700 

5760 





27760 




Average. 

5552 


G 2 -COFFEYVILLE BLOCK, KANSAS. 


Transverse Test. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span — 
inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 
from 
average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.18 

4.02 

6 

7010 

1240 

1905 

—665 

34.9 

2 .... 

3.12 

3.96 

6 

13580 

2500 


+595 

31.3 

3 .... 

3.14 

4.02 

6 

12970 

2320 


+415 

21.8 

4 .... 

3.18 

4.02 

6 

7550 

1330 


—575 

30.2 

5 .... 

3.18 

4.02 

. 6 

12060 

2120 


+215 

11.6 

6 .... 

3.18 

4.02 

6 

6950 

1220 


-685 

36.0 

7 .... 

3.18 

4.02 

6 

11370 

2000 


+ 95 

5.0 

8 .... 

3.18 

3.96 

6 

10990 

1980 


+ 75 

4.0 

9 .... 

3.24 

4.02 

6 

11550 

1990 


+ 85 

4 5 

10 .... 

3.18 

3.94 

6 

12880 

2350 


+445 

23.4 





106940 

19050 



202.7 




Av .... 

10694 

1905 



20.3 


Absorption. 

(See CofFeyville 4 ‘Brick.’/) 




















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


99 


Table 5 —Continued. 


G 2 -COFFEYVILLE BRICK, KANSAS. 


Transverse Test. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.16 

3.84 

6 

8890 

2511 

2325 

+186 

8.0 

2 

2.14 

3.78 

6 

9040 

2659 


+334 

14.4 

3 .... 

2.28 

3.84 

6 

7520 

2014 


-311 

13.4 

4 .... 

2.18 

4.14 

6 

7960 

1918 


—407 

17.5 

5 .... 

2.22 

3.89 

6 

10630 

2844 


+519 

22.3 

6 .... 

2.16 

3.84 

6 

8490 

2398 


+ 73 

3 1 

7 .... 

2 22 

3.84 

6 

8610 

2370 


+ 45 

1.9 

8 .... 

2.18 

3.82 

6 

7670 

2171 


— 154 

6 6 

9 .... 

2.32 

3.84 

6 

8000 

2105 


-220 

9.5 

10 .... 

2.22 

3.84 

6 

7780 

2141 


—184 

7.9 

11 .... 

2.22 

3.88 

6 

8800 

2371 


+ 46 

2.0 

12 .... 

2.28 

3.84 

6 

8940 

2395 


+ 70 

3.0 





102330 

27897 



109.6 




Av .... 

8528 

2325 



9.1 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bT. 

2.45 

2.465 

.015 

0.0 

2. 

2.322 

2.35 

.028 

1.6 

3. . 

2.49 

2.51 

.02 

0.2 

b 2 l. 

2.46 

2.475 

.015 

0.8 

2 

2.408 

2.425 

.025 

1.6 





4.2 




Average .... 

0.8 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lbs. per sq.in. 

1 . 

3V4 x 3% 

11 

73700 

6700 

9 

31/4 x 4 

13 

65000 

5000 

2 

314 x 4 

13 

94700 

7300 

9 . 

3V 2 x 4 

13 

79000 

6080 

10. 

3^x3>4 

11.4 

82500 

7250 





32330 




Average. 

6466 

























































































100 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


F^—DANVILLE BRICK CO., DANVILLE, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modluus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq iD. 

Av.Mod. 

Variations 

from 

Average. 

Per cent 
Variation. 

1. 

3.24 

4.20 

6 

9890 

1560 

1700 

—140 

8.2 

2. 

3 18 

3 98 

6 

11540 

2060 


+360 

21.2 

3. 

3.24 

4.20 

6 

8980 

1420 


—280 

16. & 

4 

3 22 

4 20 

6 

8460 

1340 


—360 

21.2 

5. 

3 18 

4.02 

6 

11290 

1980 


+280 

16.5 

6 

3 14 

4 08 

6 

10970 

1890 


+190 

11.2 

7. 

3 15 

4 10 

6 

11420 

1950 


+250 

14.7 

8. 

3 13 

3 96 

6 

8090 

1480 


—220 

12.9 

9. 

3 24 

4 14 

6 

9100 

1480 


—220 

12.9 

10. 

3.24 

4.08 

6 

11370 

1890 


+190 

11.2 





101110 

17050 



146.5 




Average 

10110 

1700 



14.6 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

cA.. 

2.94 

3.115 

.175 

6.0 

2. 

3.015 

3.15 

.135 

4.5 

3. 

3 23 

3.322 

.092 

2.9 

Col. 

2.085 

2.23 

.145 

7.0 

2. 

3.155 

3.275 

.12 

3.8 





24.2 




Average .... 

4.8 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

square inches. 

Area- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

1. 

314 x 3 

9.7 

39900 

4100 

4. 

334 x 2H 

7.3 

48800 

6700 

6. 

3V4 x 2% 

8.9 

37700 

4240 

6.. 

3V4 x 2% 

8.5 

42300 

5000 

10. 

3V4 x 3 

9.7 

58900 

6100 





26140 





Average .. ..5228 























































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


101 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Fjd—DANVILLE BRICK CO., DANVILLE, ILL. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variarion. 

1. 

3.34 

4.24 

6 

4970 

745 

9S0 

-235 

24.0 

2 

3.48 

4.26 

6 

7180 

1020 


+40 

4 1 

3. 

3.46 

4.52 

6 

3000 

420 


—560 

57 2 

4. 

3.34 

4.10 * 

6 

7690 

1240 


—260 

26 6 

5. 

3.36 

4.20 

6 

8560 

1310 


+330 

33 7 

6. 

7. 

3.34 

4.14 

6 

6910 

1090 


+110 

11.2 

8. 

3.30 

4.32 

6 

4700 

690 


—290 

29‘ 6 

9. 

3.30 

4.26 

6 

5400 

815 


—165 

16 8 

10. 

3.36 

4.08 

6 

9090 

1460 


+480 

49.0 





57500 

8790 



242.2 

% 



Av. 

6370 

980 



26.9 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

d+ . 

2.955 

3.03 

.078 

2.6 

2. 

3.16 

3.268 

.108 

3.4 

3. 

3.18 

3.285 

.105 

3 3 

dol . 

3.09 

3.185 

.095 

3.1 

3. . 

3.292 

3.352 

.06 

1.8 








14.2 





Average .... 

2.8 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress— 
lb. per sq. in. 

6. 

3% x 4J4 

15.2 

60600 

4000 

6. 

3 % x 4 V4 

14.3 

43400 

3040 

9. 

3% x 4 H 

14.3 

55400 

3880 

9. 

3% x i% 

14.7 

37400 

2550 

10. 

3J4 x 3-8 

12.2 

40100 

3280 





16750 





Average .... 3350 























































































to a a >-*■ 


102 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


F.e-DANVILLE BRICK CO., DANVILLE, ILL. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.36 

4.08 

6 

14380 

2300 

1670 

+630 

37.7 

2 .... 

3.36 

3.96 

6 

12650 

2160 


+490 

29.4 

3 .. 

3.24 

3.72 

6 

8160 

1640 


— 30 

1.8 

4 .... 

3.30 

3.84 

6 

9500 

1760 


+ 90 

5.4 

5 .... 

3.24 

3.96 

6 

6330 

1120 


-550 

32.9 

6 .... 

3.42 

4.20 

6 

13190 

1980 


+310 

18.6 

7 .... 

3.36 

4.08 

6 

11440 

1810 


+170 

10.2 

8 .... 

3.42 

3.96 

6 

7890 

1330 


—340 

20.4 

9 .... 

3.42 

4.32 

6 

12260 

1740 


+ 70 

4.2 

10 .... 

3.48 

4.44 

6 

6130 

805 


—865 

51.8 





101930 

16675 



212.4 




Average 

10190 

1670 



21.2 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

eD. 

2.92 

2.96 

.04 

1.4 

2. 

3.105 

3.135 

.03 

1.0 

3. 

2.75 

2.79 

.04 

1.5 

e-,1. 

2.92 

3.005 

.085 

2.9 

9 

2.81 

2.85 

.04 

1.5 





8.3 




Average. 

1.7 


Crushing. 


Number. 


Size- 

square inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

3/4 x 2J4 

8.1 

41300 

5100 

3+4 X 2 

6.5 

34200 

5260 

3H X 2 

6.5 

50900 

7830 

3J4 x 2 

6.5 

43200 

6650 

3% x 2 

6.5 

36000 

5550 




30390 




Average.6078 



















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


103 


Table 5 —Continued. 


K 5 b—ED WARDS VILLE. 
Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b 1. 

■ 



8.67 

10.71 

10.36 

8.79 

9.60 

2 




3. 




h„l. 




2. 




K 5 c 

c 1 . 




48.13 

Average ..9.62 

7.37 

5.90 

3.52 

3.84 

2.79 

2. 




c 1 . 




2. 




3. 




K 6 d 

dol. 



. \ 

• 

23.42 

Average ..4.68 

2.42 

2.86 

2.71 

2.59 

2.54 

2 




d 1. 




2 




3. 




K 5 e 

e 2 l. 




13.12 

Average ..2.62 

1.93 

1.34 

1.49 

0.77 

1.37 

2 




e 1 . 




2 




3.. 








6.90 

Average ..1.38 

















































104 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


K 2 b—HYDRAULIC, ST. LOUIS, MO. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

Remarks 

1.... 

2.88 

3.90 

6 

11970 

2460 

2430 

+ 30 

1.2 


2.... 

2.82 

3.84 

6 

11810 

2570 


• + 140 

5.8 


3... 

2.80 

3.94 

6 

15750 

3250 


+ 820 

33.7 


4.... 

2.88 

3.88 

6 

16780 

3480 


+1050 

43.2 


5 . . 

2.86 

3.96 

6 

13090 

2640 


+ 210 

8.6 


6.... 

2.76 

3.84 

6 

10340 

2290 


— 140 

5.8 


7.... 

• 2.78 

4.04 

6 

17380 

3430 


+ 1000 

41.1 


8.... 

2,96 

3.80 

6 

14150 

2980 


+ 550 

22.6 


9.... 

2.80 

4.05 

6 

5610 

1100 


—1330 

54.6 


10.... 

2.85 

3.95 

6 

6060 

1230 


+1200 

49.3 


11 

2.78 

4.05 

6 

14370 

2830 


+ 400 

16.5 


12.... 

2.88 

4.10 

6 

4640 

860 


—1570 

64.6 

Fracture 










crlayprl 















141950 

29120 



347.0 





Average 

11830 

2430 



28.9 



Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b,l. 

3 005 

3.025 

.02 

0.7 

2 . 

3.23 

3.24 

.01 

0.3 

3. 

3.235 

3.275 

.04 

1.2 

bol. 

3.12 

3.13 

.01 

0.3 

T. 

3.32 

3.33 

.01 

0.3 





2.8 




Average. 

0.6 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

square inches. 

Area- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq.in. 

11 . 

2 y 8 x 3% 

10.8 

76200 

7560 

11 . 

m x m 

10.8 

69800 

6940 

7 . 

2% x 3M 

9.3 

107500 

11500 

2 . 

2% x 334 

10.0 

77900 

7790 

10 . 

2% x 3^ 

9.3 

80500 

8650 

9 . 

2% X 3y 2 

10.0 

75400 

7540 





49980 




Average. 

8330 































































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK 


105 


Table 5 —Continued. 


K xl b—INDIANA BLOCK, BRAZIL, IND. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

Inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 
pounds 
persq. in 

Av.Mod. 

Var. # 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

Remarks. 

1 .... 

3.30 

4.35 

6 

4940 

715 

685 

+30 

4,4 


2 ,... 

3.35 

4.40 

6 

6670 

930 


+245 

35.8 


3.... 

3.35 

4.30 

6 

4280 

620 


—65 

9.5 


4.... 

3.35 

4.40 

6 

3780 

525 


+160 

23.4 


5.... 

3.35 

4.34 

6 

5000 

715 


+30 

4.4 


6 .... 

3.40 

4.30 

6 

3040 

435 


—250 

36.5 


7.... 

3.35 

4.38 

6 

6030 

845 


+160 

23.4 


8 .... 

3 30 

4 35 

,6 

5180 

745 


+60 

8.8 


9... 

3.32 

4.42 

6 

7770 

1080 


+395 

57.6 


10 .... 

3.30 

4.32 

6 

1740 

255 


-430 

62.8 

Break 





48430 

6865 


/ 

266.6 





Average 

4840 

685 



26.7 



Absorption 


Number 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet 

Gain. 

b,l. 

1.5 

1.745 

.245 

16.3 

2 . 

1.395 

1.602 

.207 

14.8 


2.528 

2.83 

.302 

11.9 

bol. 

2.005 

2.235 

.23 

11.5 


2.398 

2.665 

.267 

11.1 




Av. 

65.6 





13.1 


K xl c—INDIANA BLOCK, BRAZIL, IND. 
Transverse 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 

pounds 

persq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1 

3.18 

3.94 

6 

10850 

1980 

1510 

+470 

31.2 

2.... 

3.18 

3.84 

6 

7650 

1470 


—40 

2.6 

3 

3.16 

3.98 

6 

8340 

1510 


0 

0 

4 

3 10 

3.96 

6 

7000 

1300 


—210 

13.9 

5 

3 12 

3.96 

6 

6950 

1280 


—230 

15.2 

6 

3 24 

4.18 

6 

8320 

1320 


—190 

12.6 

7* *' 

3.12 

3.96 

6 

8330 

1540 


+30 

2.0 

8 

3.12 

4.02 

6 

7600 

1360 


—150 

9.9 

9' 

3 18 

3.86 

6 

9280 

1760 


+250 

16.6 

io!!.. 

3.18 

3.90 

6 

8660 

1610 


+100 

6.6 





82980 

15130 



110.6 




Average 

8300 

1510 



11.1 



















































































106 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cil. 

2.938 

3.062 

.124 

4.2 

9 

3.18 

3.23 

.05 

1.6 

3 .. 

3.003 

3.095 

.092 

3.1 

C 2 1. 

2.993 

3.10 

.097 

3.2 

2.. 

3.11 

3.185 

.075 

2.4 





14.5 


. 


Av. 

2.9 


Klld—INDIANA BLOCK, BRAZIL, 1ND. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

. Load- 
pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.18 

3.90 

6 

10490 

1960 

2260 ' 

-300 

13.3 

2 .... 

3.14 

3.90 

6 

10500 

1980 


—280 

12.4 

3.... 

3.14 

3.90 

6 

10680 

2020 


—240 

10.6 

4.... 

3.14 

4.05 

6 

13980 

2450 


+190 

8.4 

5 .... 

3.15 

3.94 

6 

12140 

2250 


— 10 

0.4 

6 .... 

3.22 

3.85 

6 

12850 

2430 


+170 

7.5 

7.... 

3.10 

3.94 

6 

11960 

2240 


— 20 

0.9 

8 .... 

3.15 

4.00 

6 

13950 

2500 


+240 

10.6 

9.... 

3.10 

3.95 

6 

13670 

2540 


+280 

12.4 

10.... 

3.20 

3.98 

6 

12450 

2220 


— 40 

1.8 





122670 

22590 



78.3 




Av .... 

12270 

2260 


Av. 

7.8 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

dD. 

2.955 

3.008 

.053 

1.8 

2. 

2.96 

3.015 

.055 

1.9 

3. 

2.95 

3.002 

" .052 

1.8 

d..l. 

3.025 

3.075 

.050 

1.7 

2. 

3.045 

3.10 

.055 

1.8 





9.0 




Average .... 

1.8 





















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK 


107 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Kile—INDIANA BLOCK. BRAZIL, IND. 
Transverse. 







Modulus 

of 

Rupture 

pounds 

persq.in. 


Varia- 



No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Av. 

Mod. 

tion 

from 

average 

Per cent 
variation 

Remarks. 

1 .... 

3.18 

4.38 

6 

6180 

955 

870 

+ 85 

9.8 

Overbur’d 

9 

3.18 

4.20 

6 

9260 

1480 


+610 

—235 

70.1 

.do. 

3!... 

3.30 

4.56 

6 

4810 

635 


27.0 

. .do. 

4.... 

3.42 

4.80 

6 

6220 

710 


—160 

18.4 

. .do. 

5.... 

3.18 

4.38 

6 

8520 

1260 


+390 

—245 

44.8 

. .do. 

6 ... 

3.24 

4.38 

6 

4310 

625 


28.2 

. .do. 

r j 

3.18 

4.56 

6 

4040 

550 


—320 

36.8 

. .do. 

8 .... 

3.24 

4.68 

6 

4830 

615 


—255 

29.3 

. .do. 

9.. 

3.24 

4.68 

6 

6950 

880 


+ 10 

+130 

1.1 

. .do. 

10 .... 

3.18 

4.56 

6 

7350 

1000 


14.9 

. .do. 







62770 

8710 



280.4 





Av .... 

6280 

870 



28.0 









Absorption. 


Number. 

• 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

e 2 l. 

2.31 

2.39 

.08 

3.5 

9 

2.33 

2.405 

.075 

3.2 

3. 

2.595 

2.66 

.065 

2.5 

e ? l. 

2.625 

2.678 

.053 

2.0 

2 . 

2.675 

2.74 

.065 

2.4 





13.6 




Average .... 

2.7 


S 2 b—KANSAS CITY DIAMOND. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent, 
var. 

Remarks. 

1 

2.56 

3.78 

6 

10480 

2580 

2410 

+170 

7.0 


2 

2.46 

3.70 

6 

9590 

2560 


+150 

6.2 


3 

2.50 

3.66 

6 

9180 

2470 


+ 60 

0.2 


4 

2.58 

3.72 

6 

11400 

2560 


+150 

6.2 


5 . 

2.46 

3.82 

6 

5010 

1260 


—1150 

47.6 

Over- 

6 

2 54 

3.66 

6 

7920 

2090 


-320 

13.6 

burned. 

7 

2 46 

3.64 

6 

11620 

3060 


+650 

27.0 


8 

2 58 

3.78 

6 

7040 

1720 


—690 

28.6 


9 

2 56 

3.72 

6 

9000 

2540 


+130 

5.4 


10 

2 52 

3.66 

6 

10050 

2680 


+270 

11.2 


11 

2 46 

3.72 

6 

10620 

2820 


+410 

17.0 


12 i;;; 

2.52 

3.60 

6 

9420 

2610 


+200 

8 .3 






111330 

28950 



178.3 





Average 

9280 

2410 



14.9 











































































































108 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Time. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b“l .. 

2.180 

2.200 

0.020 

0.9 

48 hours. 

2 . 

2.315 

2 330 

.015 ‘ 

.6 

. .do. 

3 . 

1 805 

1.815 

.010 

.6 

. .do. 

bol . 

2 085 

2.095 

.010 

.5 

. .do. 

“2. 

2.185 

2.205 

.020 

1.0 

. .do. 





3.6 





Av. 

0.7 



L 2 b—LAWRENCE, KANSAS. 
Tran verse. 


No. . 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Average 

Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.53 

3.61 

6 

9500 

2600 

1770 

+830 

46.8 

2 .... 

2.55 

3.62 

6 

6500 

1750 


— 20 

1.1 

3 ... 

2.55 

3.68 

6 

5670 

1470 


—300 

16.9 

4 .... 

2.50 

3.52 

6 

7200 

2100 


+330 

18.6 

5 .... 

2.53 

3.65 

6 

6600 

1770 


0 

0.0 

6 .... 

2.52 

3.60 

6 

6520 

1800 


+ 30 

1.7 

7 .... 

2.53 

3.65 

6 

4870 

1300 


—330 

18.6 

8 .... 

2.50 

3.68 

6 

5600 

1490 


—280 

15.8 

9 .... 

2.55 

3.60 

6 

7250 

1970 


+200 

11.3 

10 .... 

2.55 

3.65 

6 

5550 

1480 


—290 

16.4 





65260 

17730 

» 


147.2 




Av .... 

6530 

1770 



14.7 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

M. 

2.06 

2.112 

.052 

2.5 

2 . 

2.175 

2.202 

.027 

1.2 

3. 

2.10 

2.142 

.042 

2.0 

b 2 l. 

1.90 

1.932 

.032 

1.7 

2 .. 

2.215 

2.242 

.027 

1.2 





8.6 




Av.. 

1.7 




















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


109 


Table 5 —Continued. 


L.c—LAWRENCE, KAN. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1 .... 

2.40 

3.60 

6 

9410 

2730 

1960 

+770 

39.3 

2 .... 

2.42 

3.55 

6 

7380 

2180 


+220 

11.2 

3.... 

2.50 

3.66 

6 

7120 

1920 


-40 

2.0 

4.... 

25.2 

3.74 

6 

7240 

1860 


—100 

5.1 

5.... 

2.48 

3.52 

6 

4820 

1410 


—550 

28.0 

6 .... 

2.48 

3.64 

6 

6100 

1670 


—290 

14.8 

r? 

1 . . . . 

2.55 

3.70 

6 

7020 

1810 


—150 

7.6 

8 .... 

2.48 

3.70 

6 

7610 

2020 


+60 

3.0 

9.... 

2.47 

3.62 

6 

7090 

1980 


+20 

1.0 

10 .... 

2.50 

3.72 

6 

7630 

2000 


+40 

2.0 





71220 

19580 



114.0 




Average 

7120 

1960 



11.4 


Absorption. 




Kilos. 

Per cent. 


Number. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 


2.385 

2.408 

.023 

1.0 

2 

2.382 

2.40 

.018 

0.8 

3. 

2,34 

2.36 

.02 

0.9 

c.,1. 

2.45 

2.47 

.02 

0.8 

“9 

2.37 

2.392 

022 

0.9 






4 4 





Av. 

0.9 







Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

7 

234 x 2‘4 

6.2 

52000 

8400 

3 

234 x 234 

6.2 

58700 

9500 

9 

V /2 x 2J4 

6.2 

45800 

7400 

10 

234 x 2% 

6.9 

90000 

13000 

11 . 

2J4 x 2M 

5.6 

67700 

12000 





50300 





Av.10060 












































































110 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 

Sjb—MOBERLY, MISSOURI. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1 .. .. 

3.24 

3.62 

6 

9930 

2100 

2130 

—30 

1.4 

2 .... 

3,24 

3.66 

6 

10900 

2270 


+140 

6.6 

3.... 

3.26 

3.66 

6 

11570 

2310 


+180 

8.4 

4... 

3.24 

3.40 

6 

7840 

1890 


-240 

11.3 

5... 

3.24 

3.60 

6 

10910 

2340 


+210 

9.9 

6 ..., 

3.18 

3.66 

6 

10070 

2130 


0 

0 

7,... 

3.18 

3.62 

6 

10220 

2210 


+80 

3.8 

8 .... 

3.30 

3.72 

6 

9470 

1860 


-270 

12.7 

9.... 

3.30 

3.66 

6 

10720 

2180 


+50 

2.3 

10 .... 

3.18 

3.66 

6 

11270 

2380 


—250 

11.7 

11 .. 

3.30 

3 62 

6 

9480 

1970 


-160 

7.5 

12 .... 

3.22 

3.66 

6 

9120 

1910 


—220 

10.3 





121500 

25550 



85.8 




Average 

10125 

21300 



7.2 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b,l. 

2.59 

2.655 

.065 

2.5 

2. 

2.805 

2.875 

.075 

2.7 

3. 

2.39 

2.475 

.085 

3.6 

bol. 

2.66 

2.775 

.115 

4 3 

2. 

2.625 

2 71 

.085 

3.2 





16.2 




Av. 

3.2 


Rib—NELSONVILLE, OHIO. 

Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1 .... 

3.24 

4.02 

6 

9050 

1560 

1790 

-230 

12.8 

2 .... 

3.30 

3.96 

6 

9350 

1630 


—160 

8.9 

3.... 

3.24 

3.96 

6 

10910 

1900 


+110 

6.1 

4... 

3.30 

4.02 

6 

11050 

1870 


+80 

4.5 

5.... 

3.24 

4.02 

6 

11750 

2030 


+240 

13.4 

6 .... 

3.24 

4.02 

6 

9610 

1680 


-110 

6.1 

7.... 

3.30 

4.08 

6 

10900 

1780 


—10 

0.6 

8 .... 

3.24 

3.96 

6 

11820 

2100 


+310 

17.3 

9.... 

3.24 

4.08 

6 

10390 

1800 


+10 

0.6 

10 .... 

3.30 

3.96 

6 

9580 

1670 


—120 

6.7 

11 .... 

3.24 

4.02 

6 

10860 

1870 


+80 

4.5 

12 .... 

3.24 

4.08 

6 

9300 

1600 


-190 

10.6 





124870 

21490 



92.1 




Average 

10406 

1790 



7.7 



















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


111 


Table 5- —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bjl. 

3.465 

3 53 

.065 

1.9 

2 

3.53 

3.58 

.05 

1.4 

3. 

3.54 

3.60 

.06 

1.7 

b 1 . 

3.66 

3.71 

.05 

1.3 


3.43 

3.485 

.055 

1.6 





7.9 




Av. 

1 6 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress — 
lb. persq. in. 

1 . 

314 X 4 % 

15 

70500 

4700 

u. 

31/4 x 4 

13 

64425 

4950 

10 . 

344 x 444 

13.8 

39525 

2860 

4. 

314 X 4 % 

14.2 

52450 

3680 

7. 

3M x 4 % 

15 

39550 

2640 





18830 





Av.3766 


R. 2 b—PEEBLE’S BLOCK, PORTSMOUTH, O. 


Transverse Test. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.22 

3.90 

6 

10750 

1980 

2505 

—525 

21.0 

2 

3.18 

3.90 

6 

14420 

2690 


+185 

7.4 

3 .... 

3.18 

3.96 

6 

12590 

2270 


—235 

9.4 

4 .... 

3.22 

3.94 

6 

12420 

2250 


—255 

10.2 

5 .... 

3.18 

3.94 

6 

11980 

2180 


—325 

13.0 

6 .... 

3.12 

3.90 

6 

12300 

2340 


—165 

6.6 

7 .... 

3.18 

3.90 

6 

12140 

2260 


—245 

9.8 

8 .... 

3.14 

3.86 

6 

15060 

2900 


+395 

15.8 

9 .... 

3.18 

3.94 

6 

15290 

2780 


+275 

11.0 

10 .... 

3.12 

3.96 

6 

16490 

3040 


+535 

21.4 

11 .... 

3.18 

3.90 

6 

15850 

2950 


+445 

17.8 

12 .... 

3.22 

* 3.96 

6 

13470 

2410 


— 95 

3.8 





162760 

30050 



147.2 




Av .... 

13563 

2505 



12.3 





















































































112 


PAYING BRICK AND PAYING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


R 2 b—A bsorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bjl. 

3.375 

3.45 

.075 

2.2 

2 . 

3.525 

3.6 

.075 

2.1 

3. 

3 395 

3 47 

075 

2.2 

bol. 

3.5 

3 575 

.075 

.075 

2.1 

2 ... 

3.46 

3.535 

2.2 








10.8 





Average .... 

2.2 


J 2 b—PITTSBURG, KAN. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.CO 

3.70 

6 

9870 

2500 

2220 

+280 

12.6 

2 

2.60 

3.78 

6 

7830 

1900 


-320 

14.4 

3.... 

2.50 

3.80 

6 

7860 

1960 


-260 

11.7 

4.... 

2.44 

3.82 

6 

11600 

2940 


+720 

32.5 

5.... 

2.62 

3.70 

6 

8420 

2130 


— 90 

4.1 

6 .... 

2.55 

3.80 

6 

10390 

2530 


+310 

14.0 

7.... 

2.58 

3.85 

6 

10110 

2380 


+160 

7.2 

8 .... 

2.60 

3.94 

6 

8940 

2000 


—220 

10.0 

9.... 

2.45 

3.86 

6 

9960 

2^60 


+240 

10.8 

10 .... 

2.58 

3.85 

6 

7950 

1870 


—350 

15 8 

11 .... 

2.45 

3.80 

6 

8210 

2100 


—120 

5.4 

12 .... 

2.52 

3.92 

6 

8120 

1890 


—330 

14.8 





109360 

26660 



153.3 




Av. 

9130 

2220 



12.8 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b,l... 

2.318 

2.405 

.087 

3.8 

2. 

2.33 

2.37 

.04 

1.7 

3. 

2.473 

2.52 

.047 

1.9 

bol. 

2.30 

2.335 

.035 

1.5 

*> 

2.49 

2.55 

.06 

2.4 





11.3 




Average.. 

2.3 
























































































TALBOT.] 


TEST OF PAVING BRICK. 


113 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lbs. per sq. in. 

6 . 

6 . 

9. 

9. 

12 . 

2 ^x 2/ 2 

234 x 2% 

234 x 2?6 

234 x 3 

2}4 x 3 

6 . 2 2 

6.9 

6.6 

7.5 

7.5 

52000 

78000 

96900 

74500 

57700 

Average. 

8400 

11300 

14600 

9910 

7700 

51940 

10388 


K 9 b—POSTON BLOCK, CRAWFORDSVILLE, IND. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span— 
inches. 

Load- 
pounds. v 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.68 

4.10 

6 

4000 

585 

705 

—120 

17.0 

2 

3.53 

3.95 

6 

6340 

1040 


+335 

47.5 

3 .... 

3.75 

4.00 

6 

5030 

755 


+ 50 

7.1 

4 .... 

3.62 

4.15 

6 

4390 

635 


— 70 

9.9 

5 .... 

3.65 

4.02 

6 

3760 

575 


—130 

18.4 

6 .... 

3.6o 

4.05 

6 

4920 

755 


+ 50 

7.1 

7 .... 

3.65 

4.10 

6 

4120 

605 


—100 

14.2 

8 .... 

3.50 

4.02 

6 

4550 

725 


+ 20 

2.8 

9 .... 

3.65 

3.88 

6 

4870 

795 


+ 90 

12.8 

10 .... 

3.62 

4.05 

6 

3960 

600 


—105 

14.9 





45910 

7070 



151.7 




Average 

4594 

705 



15.2 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bG . 

2.305 

2.564 

.259 

11.2 

x 2 . 

2.66 

2 92 

.26 

9.8 

3. 

3.132 

3.38 

.248 

7.9 

bol. 

2.415 

2.68 

.265 

11.0 

2 . 

2.37 

2.636 

.26$ 

11.2 





51.1 




Average .... 

10.2 


—8 G 





















































































114 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size 

inches. 

Area 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 


3%x4 

14.5- 

56700 

3900 


3%x4X 

15.4 

60500 

3940 

5. 

396x4 

16.3 

69700 

4280 


3 5 sx4 

14.5 

50000 

3950 


3^x4 

14.5 

52400 

3600 





19670 





Average.. 3934 


K 9 c-POSTON block, crawfordsville, ind. 


Transverse. 


No. 


1 


Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

3.65 

3.85 

6 

7300 

1220 

1080 

+140 

13.0 

3.55 

3.80 

6 

4790 

840 


—240, 

22.2 

3.65 

3.85 

6 

4960 

830 


—250 

23.2 

3.62 

3.90 

6 

5230 

860 


—220 

20.4 

3.55 

3.90 

6 

8230 

1380 


+300 

27.8 

3.50 

3.90 

6 

5470 

930 


—150 

13.9 

3.55 

3.95 

6 

10380 

1690 


+610 

56.6 

3.55 

3.98 

6 

5690 

910 


—170 

15.7 

3.60 

3.95 

6 

6490 

1040 


— 40 

3.7 




58540 

9700 



196.5 



Av. 

6505 

1080 



21.8 









Absorption. 


Number. 


Kilos. 


Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cil... 

3.555 

3.79 

.235 

6.7 

2 . 

3.22 

3.444 

.222 

6.9 

3. 

3.71 

3.87 

.16 

4.3 

c 2 l. 

3.34 

3.542 

.202 

6.0 

2 . 

3.23 

3.478 

.248 

7.7 





31.6 




Average 

6.3 























































































CD CO 00 U? ^ 


TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


115 


Table 5— Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 


Size— 

Area— 

Load— 

inches. 

square inches. 

pounds. 


Stress 

lb. per sq. in. 


SVi x 3 

97.7 

86400 

8900 

3% x 3J4 

11.8 

114200 

9700 

3 5 gx 3 

10.9 

74300 

6800 

354x3 

10.9 

100400 

9200 

x 3 

10.9 

78800 

7230 




41830 




. Average ..8366 


K 9 d—POSTON BLOCK, CRAWFORDSVILLE, IND. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

w <• 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent, 
var. 

1 .... 

3.60 

3.82 

6 

9700 

1660 

2050 

-390 

19.0 

2 

3.50 

3.85 

6 

10560 

1830 


—220 

10.7 

3 .... 

3.48 

3.88 

6 

15020 

2580 


+530 

25.8 

4 .... 

3.48 

3.95 

6 

12460 

2070 


+ 20 

1.0 

5 .... 

3.50 

3.92 

6 

10010 

1680 


-370 

18.0 

6 .... 

3.60 

3.70 

6 

11640 

2140 


+ 90 

4.4 

7 .... 

3.50 

3.90 

6 

13510 

2280 


+230 

11.2 

8 .... 

3.50 

4.00 

6 

14420 

2320 


+270 

13.2 

9 .... 

3.55 

3.90 

6 

12450 

2070 


+ 20 

1.0 

10 .... 

3.62 

3.90 

6 

11450 

1880 


-170 

8.3 





121220 

20510 



112.6 




Average 

12120 

2050 



11.3 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

d+. 

3.38 

3.482 

.102 

3.0 


3.51 

3.622 

.112 

3.2 


3 70 

3.79 

.09 

2.4 

d,i. ... 

3.675 

3.76 

.085 

2.3 


3.82 

3.872 

.052 

1.4 





12.3 




Average' 1 .. 

2.5 















































































116 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 
Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 

lbs. per sq. inch. 

1. 

334 x 334 

12.2 

97800 

8020 

2. 

334 X 2% 

9.6 

97800 

10200 

5.. 

m X 234 

8.7 

79200 

9100 

9. 

3J4 x 2% 

9.6 

95000 

9900 

10. 

3J4 x 234 

8.7 

101200 

11600 





48820 





Average.9764 


K9e—POSTON BLOCK, CRAWFORDSVILLE, IND. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth — 
inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 
pounds 
per.sq. in 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

Remarks. 

1. 

3.50 

3.66 

6 

13100 

2520 

2050 

+470 

22.9 


9 

3.67 

3.55 

6 

moo 

2170 


+120 

5.8 

Badly 

3. 

3.60 

3.30 

6 

10970 

2520 


+470 

22.9 

ov’rburn’d 

4. 

3.55 

3.68 

6 

5420 

1020 


—1030 

50.2 

and 

5. 

3.55 

3.80 

6 

11790 

2070 


+20 

1.0 

very 

6. 

3.55 

3.60 

6 

10120 

1980 


—70 

3:4 

irregular 





62500 

12280 



106.2 





Average 

10120 

2050 



17.7 



Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

e,l.. 

3.255 

3.285 

.03 

0.9 

2 . 

3.41 

3.433 

.023 

.7 

3. 

3.485 

3.505 

.02 

.6 

e.,1. 

3.465 

3.50 

.035 

1.0 

9 

3.665 

3.69 

.025 

.7 





3.9 




Average .... 

0.8 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

i. 

x 2% 

9.6 

108400 

11300 

2. 

334 x 2J4 

8.7 

89500 

10300 


314 x 3 

10.5 

134000 

12800 


334 X 214 

7.8 

80500 

10300 


3U X 2% 

9.6 

66000 

6900 





15600 




Average. 

10320 







































































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


117 


Table 5—Continued. 


K 6 b—PURINGTON BLOCK. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

1 . 




6.53 

5.37 

5.48 

5.82 

8.07 

31.27 

6.25 

2 ... 




3. 




4.. 




5. 







Average .... 


K s c. 


cl . . 




3.75 

3.76 
4.92 
4.92 
4.38 




















Average .... 

19.97 

3.99 


K 0 d. 






0.27 





0.84 





0.28 





0.57 





0.00 





1.96 




Average .... 

0 39 


K 6 e. 






1.25 





0.43 





0.95 





0.98 





0.85 





4.46 




Average .... 

0.89 


K G b 2 . 






6.48 

7.55 

5.88 

4.90 








Average .... 

7.76 

32.57 

6.51 




















































































118 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5—Continued. 


Purington Block— Concluded. 


K 6 c 2 • 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cllol. 




4 33 

9 




7 17 

clI l. 




4 74 

2. 




3 68 

3. 




8 9 9 





28.21 




Average .... 

5.64 


K 4 b—SPRINGFIELD, ILL. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth, 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 

pounds 

persq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.73 

4.20 

6 

4150 

780 

980 

-200 

20.4 

2 .... 

2.75 

4.22 

6 

5120 

945 


— 35 

3.6 

3 . .. 

2.75 

4.10 

6 

3340 

650 


—330 

33.7 

4 .... 

2.70 

4.15 

6 

3860 

750 


—230 

23,5 

5 .... 

2.72 

4.20 

6 

5010 

950 


— 30 

3.1 

6 .... 

2.72 

4.15 

6 

6150 

1180 


+200 

20.4 

7 .... 

2.70 

4.15 

6 

6170 

1195 


+215 

21.9 

8 .... 

2.70 

4.10 

6 

5380 

10/0 


+ 90 

9.2 

9 .... 

2.72 

4.10 

6 

5160 

1020 


+ 40 

4.1 

10 .... 

2.70 

4.18 

6 

6620 

126a 


+280 

28.6 





50990 

9800 



168.5 


' 


Average 

5100 

980 



16.8 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

. 

Gain. 

1. 

1.415 

1.595 

.180 

12.7 


1.625 

1.825 

.2 

12.3 

3. 

1.93 

2.155 

.225 

11.7 


1.93 

2.165 

.235 

12.2 


1.86 

2.085 

.225 

12.1 





61.0 




Average .... 

12.2 


























































































Cot\JK I I I ’CD 05 05 cn tO 


TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


119 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Crushing. 


Number. 


Size— 
inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

2^x3^ 

I 8.9 

10200 

1150 

2Mx3% 

10.3 

15700 

1520 

2% x 3M 

8.9 

19100 

2150 

2% x 3 

8.2 

23200 

2840 

2% x 4 

11.0 

28800 

2620 




10280 




Average ..2056 


K 4 c-SPRINGFIELD, ill. 


Transverse. 


Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

2.58 

3.95 

6 

11220 

2520 

2360 

+160 

6.8 

2.65 

3.80 

6 

10350 

2440 


+ 80 

3.4 

2.60 

3.85 

6 

12630 

2960 


+600 

25.4 

2.55 

3.90 

6 

8260 

1920 


-440 

18.7 

2.62 

4.00 

6 

10510 

2260 


—100 

4.2 

2.62 

3.95 

6 

9400 

2080 


-320 

13.6 




62370 

14180 



72.1 



Average 

10395 

2360 



8.0 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 


2.52 

2.67 

.15 

5.95 

2 . 

2.51 

2.61 

.10 

4.00 


2.54 

2.67 

.13 

5.12 

4 . 

2.425 

2.56 

.135 

5.57 


2.54 

2.645 

.105 

4.14 





24.78 




A verage_ 

5.00 



















































































r-i AO b 


120 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 

Crushing. 


6 

0 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 


2^x4 

10.5 

55400 

,5280 


xSM 

9.8 

52000 

5300 


2 % x 3J^ 

9.2 

56700 

6170 


5 s X3?4- 

9.8 

40200 

4100 



8.5 

41700 

4900 





25750 




Average .. „. 

5150 


K 4 d—SPRINGFIELD, ILL 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth— 
inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

2.68 

2.65 

6 

9120 

2300 

2250 

+ 50 

2.2 

2_ 

2.62 

3.85 

6 

10770 

2490 


+240 

10 7 

3 .... 

2.58 

3.88 

6 

11290 

2610 


+360 

16.0 

4 .... 

2.60 

3.80 

6 

8350 

2000 


—250 

11.1 

5 .... 

2.62 

3.82 

6 

10690 

2520 


+270 

12.0 

b 

2.62 

3 78 

6 

7470 

1800 


—450 

20 0 

7 

2.62 

3.90 

6 

10290 

2330 


+ 80 

3.6 

8 .... 

2.65 

.3.70 

6 

7850 

1950 


—300 

13.3 

9 .... 

2.65 

3.70 

6 

11360 

2820 


+570 

25.3 

10 .... 

2.68 

3.70 

6 

8170 

2010 


—240 

10.7 

11 .... 

2.55 

3.90 

6 

8350 

1940 


—310 

13.8 

12 .... 

2.65 

3.80 

6 

9410 

2220 


— 30 

1.3 





113120 

26990 



140.0 




Average 

9130 

2250 



11.7 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Dxl. 

2.69 

2.72 

.03 

1.1 

2. 

2.76 

2.794 

.034 

1.2 

D.l. 

2.645 

2.675 

.03 

1.1 

9 

2.79 

2.82 

.03 

1.1 

3. 

2.565 

2.593 

.028 

1.1 





5.6 




Average .... 

1.1 





















































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


121 


Table 5 — Continued. 


K 4 e—SPRINGFIELD, ILL. 


Transverse Test. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1.... 

2.60 

3.98 

6 

16150 

3530 

1890 

+1640 

86.7 

2 .... 

2.63 

4.03 

6 

3000 

635 


—1255 

66.4 

3.... 

2.65 

4.10 

6 

9140 

2000 


+ no 

5.8 

4.... 

2.70 

4.08 

6 

8800 

1760 


— 130 

6.9 

5.... 

2.70 

4.05 

6 

12260 

2490 


+ 600 

31.8 

6 .... 

2.63 

4.10 

6 

4430 

905 


— 985 

52.2 





53780 

11320 



249.8 




Average 

8960 

1890 



41.6 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

1 . 

1.69 

1.702 

.012 

0.6 

9 

1.625 

1.642 

.017 

.7 

3. 

1.64 

1.655 

.015 

.6 

4. 

2.37 

2.392 

.022 

.5 

5. 

2.635 

2.665 

.030 

.5 






2.9 





Average. 

0.6 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq.in. 

l. . 

2 5 -8 X 3% 

8.8 

33200 

3780 

3 

2% x 4 

10.5 

31800 

3020 

3 . 

2% x 4 

10.5 

31600 

3000 

4 

2% x 2% 

7.2 

34600 

4800 


2.% x 3 

7.9 

26300 

3340 





17940 




Average. 

3588 


















































































122 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


V8c—STREATOR PAVING BRICK COMPANY. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Col. 




0.89 

3.96 

5.05 

4.24 

3.41 

2 . 




c l. 




2 . 




3 . 






\ 

Average .... 

17.55 

3.51 


V8d. 


d 1. 




0.47 

0.50 

0.46 

0.48 

0.46 

2. 




dol. 




2. 




3. 












2.37 




Average .... 

.49 


V8e. 


eol. 




0.00 

0.50 

0.47 

0.49 

0.50 

2. 




e 1. 




2. 




3. 







Average .... 

1.96 

.39 


K 10 b—TERRE HAUTE BLOCK, TERRE HAUTE, IND. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

rupture,— 
pounds 
persq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1. 

3.40 

4.00 

6 

8510 

1410 

1375 

+ 35 

2.5 

2. 

3.20 

4.10 

6 

7960 

1330 


45 


3. 

3.35 

4.05 

6 

8560 

1410 


+ 35 

2 5 

4. 

3.25 

3.95 

6 

9170 

1630 


+255 

18.6 

5. 

3.25 

3.98 

6 

8030 

1410 


+ 35 

2 5 

6. 

3.22 

3.90 

6 

4480 

825 


—550 

40.0 

7. 

3.35 

3.95 

6 

-8520 

1470 


+ 95 

6 9 

8. 

3.42 

4.10 

6 - 

12060 

1890 


+515 

37.5 

9. 

3.25 

3.90 

6 

5560 

1010 


—365 

21.6 





72850 

12385 



135.4 




Average 

8090 

1375 

\ 


15.0 









































































































TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


123 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

b,l . 

2.69 

2.948 

.258 

9.6 

2 . 

2.758 

3.04 

.282 

10.2 

3 . 

2.39 

2.565 

.175 

7.3 

bol . 

2.42 

2.64 

.22 

9.1 

2 . 

2.625 

2.872 

.247 

9.4 





45.6 




Average. 

9.1 


K 10 c—TERRE HAUTE BLOCK, TERRA HAUTE, IND. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

rupture,— 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 

from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

1. 

3.15 

3.71 

6 

11100 

2300 

1910 

+ 390 

20.4 

2. 

3.30 

3.72 

6 

4330 

855 


—1055 

55.2 

3. 

3.30 

3.65 

6 

11730 

2410 


+ 500 

26 2 

4. 

3.25 

3.80 

6 

4750 

910 


—1000 

52.4 

5. 

3.22 

3 88 

6 

10560 

1960 


+ 50 

2 6 

6. 

3.30 

3.75 

6 

12160 

2360 


+ 450 

23.5 

7. . 

3.20 

3.80 

6 

8540 

1660 


— 250 

13.1 

8. .. 

3.20 

3.80 

6 

10360 

1950 


+ 40 

2.1 

9. 

3.22 

3.94 

6 

14480 

2600 


+ 690 

36.1 

10. 

3.35 

3.85 

6 

11660 

2110 


200 

10.5 





99670 

19110 



242.1 




Average 

9667 

1910 



24.2 


Absorption. 


Number. 


Kilos. 


Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cil. 

2.865 

2.97 

.105 

3.7 

o 

3.33 

3.37 

.04 

1.2 

3. 

2.615 

2.658 

.043 

1.6 

c 2 l. 

2.91 

2.968 

.058 

2.0 

2 . . 

3.065 

3.105 

.04 

1.3 





9.8 




Average .... 

2.0 



























































































Ci OI 4*» rf*. to 


124 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Tab le 5 —Continued. 


K 10 d—TERRE HAUTE BLOCK, TERRE HAUTE, IND. 


Transverse. 


eadth, 

ches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 

pounds 

persq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

3.20 

3.75 

6 

14300 

2870 

2340 

+530 

22.6 

3.25 

3.75 

6 

11680 

2300 


— 40 

1.7 

3.15 

3.75 

6 

13300 

2710 


+370 

15.8 

3.20 

3.90 

6 

9680 

1800 


-540 

23.1 

3.20 

3.80 

6 

11280 

2210 


—130 

5.5 

3.23 

3.88 

6 

12290 

2290 


— 50 

2.1 

3.20 

3.85 

6 

11730 

2230 


—110 

4.7 




84260 

16410 



75.5 



Average 

12040 

2340 



10.8 


No. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 
7 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

dil . 

2.843 

2.868 

.025 

0.9 

2 . 

2.61 

2.625 

.015 

0.6 

3. 

2.69 

2.718 

.028 

1.0 

d 2 l . 

2.68 

2.718 

.038 

1.4 

2 . 

2.51 

2.538 

.028 

1.1 





5.0 




Average .... 

1.0 


Crushing. 


Number. 


Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lbs. per sq. in. 

m x 3 a 

10.6 

76700 

7250 

334 x 4 

13. 

76800 

5900 

334 x 3 

9.7 

34700 

3580 

3H x 

11.4 

71500 

6250 

334 x 334 

10.1 

70000 

6940 




29920 



Average. 

5984 




























































































CDOO-JOiCn^-COtsDH* 


TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


125 


Table 5 — Continued. 


KlOe TERRE HAUTE BLOCK, TERRE HAUTE, IND. 


Transverse. 







Modulus 




No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- - 
inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 


3.25 

4.00 

6 

18010 

3130 

1880 

+1250 

66.5 

3.33 

3.88 

6 

12260 

2200 


+320 

17.0 

3.45 

4.15 

6 

7250 

1100 


—780 

41.5 

3.40 

4.10 

6 

13200 

2080 


+200 

10.6 

3.25 

3.85 

6 

8020 

1500 


—380 

20.2 

3.32 

4.22 

6 

10020 

1530 


—350 

18.6 

3 30 

4.00 

6 

10100 

1720 


—160 

8.5 

3.30 

4.00 

6 

7930 

1350 


-530 

28.2 

3.35 

3.85 

6 

12670 

2290 


+410 

21.8 




99460 

16900 



232.9 



Average 

11050 

1880 



25.9 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

l 

Wet. 

1 

Gain. 

r* 1 . 

2.74 

2.765 

.025 

0.9 

2 . 

3.03 

3.048 

.018 

.6 

3 . 

2.80 

2.82 

.02 

.7 

c o I . 

2.74 

2.762 

.022 

.8 

2 . 

2.578 

2.605 

.027 

1.0 





4.0 




Average .... 

0.8 


Crushing. 


7 

8 
9 
9 

10 


Number. 


Size— Area- 

inches. square inches. 


Load- 

pounds. 


Stress— 
lb. per sq. in. 


3*4x3% 
3*4x3 % 
3*4 x 4*4 
3*4 x 3*4 
3*4x4% 


11 . 

12.2 

13.4 

11.4 
14.2 


24300 

43000 

21000 

21400 

41500 


2200 

3520 

1570 

1880 

2920 


12090 

2418 


Average 
























































































126 


PAVING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


H,b 


TOPEKA, KAN. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

2 .... 

2.58 

3.90 

6 

8840 

2030 

2300 


- 270 

11 7 

3 .... 

2.34 

3.84 

6 

10540 

.2750 



b 450 

19 6 

4_ 

2.46 

3.90 

6 

12610 

3040 



b 740 

32 2 

5 .... 

2.46 

3.88 

6 

10360 

2520 



b 220 

9 6 

6 .... 

2.52 

3.84 

6 

8280 

2020 



- 980 

12 2 

7 .... 

2.46 

4.02 

6 

11250 

2550 


+ 250 

10 9 

8 .... 

2.28 

4.02 

6 

10160 

2480 


4- 180 

7 8 

9 .... 

2.44 

3.90 

6 

8950 

2180 



- 120 

5 2 

10 .... 

2.46 

3.96 

6 

9740 

2270 



- 30 

1 3 

n .... 

2.52 

3.84 

6 

9090 

2220 



- 80 

3 5 

12 .... 

2.46 

3.96 

6 

9500 

2220 



- 80 

3 5 

13 .... 

2.44 

3.90 

6 

5520 

1340 



- 960 

41.8 





114840 

27620 




159.3 




Average 

9570 

2300 



13.3 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bxl . 

o 

2.235 

2.315 

.02 

0.9 

c . 

2.19 

2.225 

.035 

1 6 

o. 

L 4 . 

2.098 

2.118 

.02 

1 0 


2.092 

2.115 

.023 

1 0 

L . 

2.182 

2.215 

.033 

1.5 





6.0 




Average .... 

1.2 


K s b—WABASH CLAY CO„ WEEDERSBURG, IND. 
Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation . 

1 .... 

2 .... 

3.62 

3.60 

3.50 

3.50 

3.60 

3.55 

3.60 

3.50 

3.90 

3.95 

6 

6 

1730 

4170 

285 

670 

585 

—300 
-4- 85 
+105 
+180 
+160 
—150 
+ 65 

0 

51.3 

14.5 
17.9 
30.8 

27.3 

25.6 
11.1 

.0 

3 .... 

4.05 

6 

4380 

690 


4 # ... 

4.05 

6 

4860 

765 


5 .... 

6 .... 

3.90 

6 

4530 

745 


4.00 

6 

2740 

435 


7 .... 

8 .... 

3.95 

6 

3260 

520 


4.09 

6 

3630 

585 













29300 

4695 



178.5 




Average 

3660 

585 



22.3 






- 


































































































































TALBOT.] 


TESTS OF PAYING BRICK. 


127 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

bjl . 

3.128 

3.43 

.302 

9.7 

9 

3.055 

3.338 

.283 

9.3 

3. 

3.135 

3.47 

.335 

10.7 

b.,1. 

2.712 

2.98 

.268 

9.9 

9 

3.192 

3.485 

.293 

.9.7 





49.3 



* 

Average. 

9.9 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

square inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

1 . 

384 x 3?4 

12.7 

56900 

4500 

3. 

3J4 x 3 % 

12.7 

34300 

2700 

4. 

3V2 x 4 

14. 

26500 

1890 

4. 

3 ^x 314 

10.9 

27000 

2480 

8. 

3^x4^ 

14.9 

31800 

2140 





13710 

• 




Average.2742 


K 8 c-WABASH CLAY CO., VEEDERSBURG, IND. 


Transverse. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modluus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variations 

from 

Average. 

Per cent 
Variation. 

1. 

3.50 

'3.90 

6 

5530 

940 

1035 

— 95 

9.2 

2. 

3 50 

3.95 

6 

6730 

1110 


+ 75 

7.2 

3 

3 50 

3 90 

6 

5120 

870 


—165 

16.0 

4. 

3 52 

3.88 

6 

7620 

1300 


+265 

25.6 

5. 

3 50 

3.90 

6 

4470 

755 


—280 

27.1 

6. 

3 50 

3.98 

6 

6040 

980 


— 55 

5.3 

7. 

3.55 

3.92 

6 

7810 

1290 


+255 

24.7 





43320 

7245 



115.1 




Average 

6190 

1035 



16.4 
























































































CDOO-OCDOl^COCOK-k- 


128 


PAYING BE ICE AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

Cil . 

3.135 

3.38 

.245 

7.3 

2 . 

3.130 

3.34 

.21 

6.7 

3. 

3 098 

3.375 

.277 

8.9 

Col. 

3.085 

3.345 

.26 

8.4 

2 . 

3.202 

3.444 

.242 

7.6 





39.4 




Average .... 

7.9 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress— • 
lbs. per sq. in. 


3^> x i% 

15.3 

83200 

5440 


3^x4 

14.0 

61400 

4380 

9 

3J£ x 5 

17.5 

65900 

3760 


334 x 4J4 

15.7 

47500 

3020 


334 x ly 2 

15.7 

107400 

6800 


sy x 2 % 

9.2 

37200 

4040 


334 x 4 5 4 

16.2 

72040 

4450 



15.3 

46500 

3040 


x 4J4 

14.8 

64400 

4320 




# 

39250 



* 

Average. 

4361 


K8d—WABASH CLAY CO., VEEDERSBURG, IND. . 
Transverse. 


No. 


Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

3.48 

3.80 

6 

10350 

1860 

1440 

+420 

3.38 

3.90 

6 

5760 

1010 


—430 

3.35 

3.90 

6 

10960 

1940 


-4-500 

3.45 

3.80 

6 

10990 

1990 


+550 

3.40 

3.85 

6 

7750 

1390 


— 50 

3.35 

3.88 

6 

7190 

1290 


—150 

3.40 

3.80 

6 

3110 

570 


—870 

3.40 

3.80 

6 

9060 

1660 


+220 

3.40 

3.83 

6 

7050 

1280 


—160 




72220 

12990 





Average 

8020 

1440 




Per cent 
variation. 


29.2 
29.8 
34.T 

38.2 
3.5 

10.4 

60.3 

15.3 
11.1 


232.5 

25.8 







































































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAVING BRICK. 


129 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 

di. 

3 285 

3.40 

.115 

3.5 

2 . 

3.22 

3.355 

.135 

4.2 

3. 

3.312 

3.445 

.133 

4.0 

dil. 

3.362 

3.488 

.126 

3.8 

2 . 

3.362 

3.40 

.138 

4.2 





19.7 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

1;.... 

3 M x 3M 

11.4 

57800 

5060 

2. 

SJ-2 X 

12.7 

35900 

2820 


3^x3 

10.7 

26100 

2480 


3V 2 x 3V4 

11.4 

61500 

5400 


334 x3M 

11.4 

71000 

6230 





21990 





Average ... 4398 


K 8 e—WABASH CLAY CO., VEEDERSBURG, IND. 


Transverse Test. 


No. 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture- 
pounds 
per sq. in. 

Av.Mod. 

Variation 

from 

average. 

Per cent 
variation. 

1 .... 

3.50 

3.84 

6 

4350 

760 

810 

— 50 

6.2 

2 .... 

3.50 

4.00 

6 

6590 

1060 


+250 

30.8 

3 .... 

3.50 

3.95 

6 

4050 

670 


—140 

17.3 

4 .... 

3.50 

4.00 

6 

4900 

790 


— 20 

2.5 

5 .... 

3.50 

3.90 

6 

2200 

370 


—440 

54.3 

6 .... 

3.55 

3.80 

6 

2700 

475 


-335 

41.3 

7 .... 

3.50 

3.80 

6 

1880 

335 


—475 

58.6 

8 .... 

3.50 

3.90 

6 

1900 

320 


—490 

60.5 

9 .... 

3.52 

4.00 

6 

11000 

1760 


+950 

117.4 

10 .... 

3.52 

4.00 

6 

9750 

1560 


+750 

92.5 





49320 

8090 



481.4 




Average 

4930 

810 



48.1 


—9 G 
















































































130 


PAYING BRICK AND PAVING BRICK CLAYS. 


[BULL. NO. 9 


Table 5 —Continued. 


Absorption. 


Number. 


Kilos. 

* 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet. 

Gain. 


2.11 

2.13 

.02 

1.0 

2. 

2.725 

2.77 

.045 

1.6 


3.76 

3.815 

.055 

1.5 

4. 

2.495 . 

2.54 

.045 

1.8 

5. 

3.6 

3.67 

.07 

1.9 





7.8 



Average. 

1.6 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

1. 


12.2 

89300 

7300 

2. 

3^x3 

10.5 

70600 

6730 

5. 

334 x 314 

10.9 

100000 

9160 

'7. 

334 x 334 

12.2 

115000 

9450 

10. 

334 x m 

13.1 

70100 

5350 





37990 





Average .... 7598 


K 14 b—WESTERN PAVER, DANVILLE, ILL, 


Transverse. 


• 

Breadth- 

inches. 

Depth- 

inches. 

Span- 

inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Modulus 

of 

Rupture, 
pounds 
per sq.in. 

Av.Mod. 

Var. 
from av. 

Per cent 
var. 

Remarks 

1.... 

3.48 

4.08 

6 

9180 

1424 

1617 

-193 

11.9 


2.... 

3.54 

4.06 

6 

9820 

1515 


—102 

6.3 


3.... 

3.48 

4.02 

6 

11220 

1795 


4-178 

11.0 


4.... 

3.58 

3.96 

6 

9610 

1541 


— 76 

4 7 


5.... 

3.46 

4.08 

6 

9260 

1447 


—170 

10.5 


6.... 

3.60 

4.02 

6 

10510 

1625 


+ 8 

0.5 


7.... 

3.48 

4.02 

6 

10330 

1653 


+ 36 

2.2 


8.... 

3.48 

3.96 

6 

10310 

1700 


4- 83 

5.1 


9.... 

3.46 

4.02 

6 

10120 

1629 


+ 12 

0.7 


10.... 

3.60 

3.90 

6 

8300 

1364 


-253 

15.6 

Irregular 

11.... 

3.42 

4.02 

6 

12860 

2094 


4-477 

29.5 

shape 

12.... 

3.58 

4.02 

6 

10370 

1613 


— 4 

0.2 

caused 










eccentric 





121890 

19400 



98.2 

load. 




Average 

10160 

1167 



CM 

CO 

• 

































































































TALBOT] 


TESTS OF PAYING ERICK. 


131 


Table 5 —Concluded. 


Absorption. 


Number. 

Kilos. 

Per cent. 

Dry. 

Wet, 

Gain. 

bjl . 

3.512 

3.676 

.164 

4.7 

2 . 

3.810 ‘ 

3.975 

.165 

4.3 

o 

3.725 

3.875 

.150 

4.0 

b 2 l . 

3.505 

3.675 

.170 

3.9 

2 . 

3.700 

3.855 

.155 

4.2 










21.1 


i 



Average .... 

4.2 


Crushing. 


Number. 

Size- 

inches. 

Area- 

square inches. 

Load- 

pounds. 

Stress- 
lb. per sq. in. 

5. 

3K 2 x4 

14. 

50000 

3580 

7. 

334 x 4 

14. 

94500 

6750 

9. 

334 X m 

13.1 

86800 

6640 

10. 

334 x 334 

12.2 

51200 

4200 

11 . 

334 x 334 

12.2 

60100 

4950 





26120 




Average. 

5224 






















































* 


■w 





» 








* 













. 













4 























r 









* 








i 







* 



% • 
























0 020 501 329 5 










\ \ 




* 


t 





\ . f 


S J 








